Suffolk Traffic Cameras Lawsuit sees dismissal

Published 10:00 am Thursday, October 3, 2024

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

The ongoing lawsuit involving Suffolk’s Speed Enforcement Cameras has been dismissed by the Fifth Judicial Court.

According to documents from Suffolk Circuit Court, the case involving Curtis David Lytle v. City of Suffolk was dismissed based on “prejudice for lack of jurisdiction” with the court sustaining the City of Suffolk’s “Special Plea of Governmental Immunity.”

This follows from Plaintiff Curtis David Lytle receiving a notice of violation/summons for alleged speeding in Suffolk, with the notice demanding payment of $100. Lytle claims the city’s failure to “issue a Virginia Uniform Traffic Summons” and court date schedule as procedure in traffic cases “constitutes what amounts to a material failure to follow the same procedures as traffic cases and traffic violations” and contends that all City notices “violate state law.” It also states that Lytle claimed the city failed to follow procedures for filing an “affidavit for non-liability.” 

Email newsletter signup

Based on VA. Code 46.2-882.1, the city’s use of photo speed monitoring devices, is authorized within the Commonwealth of Virginia. The documents also states that in March 2023, the city adopted ordinance 23-0-029, amending the Suffolk City Code to additional sections on traffic regulation, including Section 86-318, mirroring the language of Va. Code 46.2-882.1.

Attorney Timothy Anderson of Anderson & Anderson Associates provided a statement via the dismissal. 

“Update on the speed camera lawsuit in Suffolk – without addressing the merits of the lawsuit, the Suffolk Circuit Court found that the operation of speed cameras was a governmental function of the City of Suffolk and dismissed the lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction under the doctrine of Sovereign Immunity,” he said. “We are waiting for Chesapeake Circuit Court to rule – and then make decisions on next steps – to include an appeal or possibly file a different type of action.”

The Suffolk News-Herald reached out to the City for a statement, but have yet to receive a response.