• Willingham v. State

    Publication Date: 2005-12-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Benham, Robert
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Randolph Frails, Augusta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Daniel J. Craig, District Attorney, Charles R. Sheppard, Michael S. Carlson Assistant District Attorneys, Augusta, Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, and Robin J. Leigh, Assistant Attorney General, Atlanta, for appellee.

    Case Number: S05A1036

    Testimony from the now-deceased star witness at the prior trial of the defendant's accomplice was not admissible under O.C.G.A. § 24-3-10 because the defendant was not a party to the earlier trial

  • Tennille v. State

    Publication Date: 2005-12-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Benham, Robert
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ernie M. Sheffield, Bainbridge, and Robert R. McLendon IV, Blakely, for appellant.
    for defendant: Joseph K. Mulholland, District Attorney, and J. Brown Moseley, District Attorneys, Bainbridge, for appellee.

    Case Number: S05A0927

    The defendant lacked standing to challenge the constitutionality of O.C.G.A. § 16-12-100 because he failed to show that the statute adversely impacted his r

  • Mallen v. Mallen

    Publication Date: 2005-12-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Benham, Robert
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Edward E. Bates Jr. and Andrea M. Dyer Warner, Mayoue, Bates, Nolen & Collar, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Richard W. Schiffman Jr. and Kurt A. Kegel Davis, Matthews & Quigley PC, Atlanta, for appellee.

    Case Number: S05F0982

    Neither the wife's pregnancy, nor the threat of not going forward with a wedding, constituted sufficient duress to void an otherwise valid prenuptial con

  • Ramos v. Terry

    Publication Date: 2005-12-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Benham, Robert
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Roberto Ramos, Glennville, proceeded pro se. Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, and Jason C. Fisher, Assistant Attorney General, Atlanta, for appellee. Amicus Appellant: Sarah L. Gerwig-Moore and Leigh S. Schrope Georgia Public Defender Council, Atlanta.
    for defendant:

    Case Number: S05A1123

    The defendant waived any argument regarding the qualifications of the interpreter at his habeas hearing by failing to object at that

  • Community Renewal and Redemption LLC v. Nix

    Publication Date: 2005-11-18
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Benham, Robert
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Sam G. Dickson, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Hugh C. Wood Wood & Meredith LLP, Tucker, for appellee.

    Case Number: S05A0877

    The plain language of OCGA § 48-4-42 requires adverse possession by a tax deed grantee in order for the property's title to ripen under the st

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    North Texas Bench Book 2024

    Authors: A Project of The Dallas Bar Association

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Travis v. Travis

    Publication Date: 2005-11-18
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Benham, Robert
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert P. McFarland, Cumming, for appellant.
    for defendant: . Kelli L. Wolk Moore, Ingram, Johnson & Steele LLP, Marietta, for appellee.

    Case Number: S05A1128

    A residuary testamentary gift, by definition, does not direct the delivery of any particular property to a will's benefi

  • Waldrip v. Head

    Publication Date: 2005-11-04
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Benham, Robert
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David J. Kessler, Lawrence J. Fox and Alicia D. Hickok Drinker, Biddle & Reath LLP, Philadelphia, Penn., for appellant.
    for defendant: Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, and Patricia B. A. Burton, Assistant Attorney General, Atlanta, for appellee. Other party representation: Christopher Adams, Holly L. Geerdes, Georgia Capital Defender, and Richard A. Malone Prosecuting Attys' Council, Atlanta.

    Case Number: S05A1402

    The death penalty defendant did not show prejudice to his defense at trial based on the state's failure to produce a 22-page "Summary Report," which apparently summarized various aspects of the murd

  • Belmar v. State

    Publication Date: 2005-11-04
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Benham, Robert
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gerard B. Kleinrock, Decatur, for appellant.
    for defendant: Gwendolyn K. Fleming, District Attorney, Robert M. Coker and Sheila A. Connors, Assistant District Attorneys, Decatur, Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, and Robin J. Leigh, Assistant Attorney General, Atlanta, for appellee.

    Case Number: S05A1564

    The defendant admitted to his girlfriend that he shot and killed a man and left his body in a school parkin

  • Waldrip v. Head

    Publication Date: 2005-10-28
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Benham, Robert
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David J. Kessler, Lawrence J. Fox and Alicia D. Hickok Drinker, Biddle & Reath LLP, Philadelphia, Penn., for appellant.
    for defendant: Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, and Patricia B. A. Burton, Assistant Attorney General, Atlanta, for appellee. Other party representation: Christopher Adams, Holly L. Geerdes, Georgia Capital Defender, and Richard A. Malone Prosecuting Attys' Council, Atlanta.

    Case Number: S05A1402

    The death penalty defendant did not show prejudice to his defense at trial based on the state's failure to produce a 22-page "Summary Report," which apparently summarized various aspects of the murd

  • Smith v. Laymon

    Publication Date: 2005-10-14
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Benham, Robert
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Bruce D. Dubberly Jr. Dubberly & McGovern, Glennville, for appellant.
    for defendant: . Hugh J. McCullough McCullough & Swindell PC, Glennville, for appellees.

    Case Number: S05A0730

    The seller's after-acquired title to a large parcel of land immediately vested title to a smaller strip of land that was contained therein to the appellees, who bought the strip during the pendency