Ambrose v. Sheppard

Evidence that plaintiffs bought defendant's land based on his promise to monitor timber cutting on that land raised a jury question on plaintiffs' promissory estoppel claim based on damage to the property caused by improper timber cutting.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Isaiah and Cynthia Ambrose appeal the grant of summary judgment to Larry G. Sheppard in this action against Sheppard and Gay Wood Company for property damage caused when Gay Wood Company cut timber on the Ambroses’ land. Because material issues of fact remain for jury resolution on the Ambrose’s promissory estoppel claim, we reverse.

“To prevail at summary judgment under OCGA § 9-11-56, the moving party must demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the undisputed facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, warrant judgment as a matter of law. OCGA § 9-11-56 c. A defendant may do this by showing the court that the documents, affidavits, depositions and other evidence in the record reveal that there is no evidence sufficient to create a jury issue on at least one essential element of plaintiff’s case. . . . A defendant who will not bear the burden of proof at trial need not affirmatively disprove the nonmoving party’s case; instead, the burden on the moving party may be discharged by pointing out by reference to the affidavits, depositions and other documents in the record that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party’s case. If the moving party discharges this burden, the nonmoving party cannot rest on its pleadings, but rather must point to specific evidence giving rise to a triable issue. OCGA § 9-11-56 e.” Citation omitted. Lau’s Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491 405 SE2d 474 1991. Our review is de novo. Walker v. Virtual Packaging, LLC, 229 Ga. App. 124 493 SE2d 551 1997.

Ambrose v. Sheppard

Evidence that plaintiffs bought defendant's land based on his promise to monitor timber cutting on that land raised a jury question on plaintiffs' promissory estoppel claim based on damage to the property caused by improper timber cutting.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report