Filter This View

  • Almassud v. Mezquital

    Publication Date: 2018-05-04
    Practice Area: Motor Vehicle Torts | Personal Injury
    Industry: Automotive
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Presiding Judge McFadden
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Laurie Daniel, Matthew Friedlander (Holland & Knight), Atlanta; Trevor Hiestand (Waldon Adelman Castilla Hiestand & Prout), Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Ben Brodhead, Ashley Fournet (Brodhead Law LLC), Atlanta, for appellee. J. Pierce (Pierce & Dunkelberger), Atlanta, for other party.
    Case Number: A17A2119

    Trial Court Should Have Instructed Jury on Defendant's Theory That Alleged Negligence Per Se was Unknowing and Unintentional

  • Natasha Blakemore As Mother Of Natroya Hulbert v. Dirt Movers, Inc. et al.

    Publication Date: 2018-01-22
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Motor Vehicle Torts
    Industry:
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Judge Self
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Scott Stevens (Greene & Cooper, LLP), Roswell, for appellant.
    for defendant: Brent Estes, Grant Smith (Dennis, Corry, Porter & Smith, LLP), Atlanta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A17A1540

    The plain language of O.C.G.A. § 14-2-510 (b) (4) limits a defendant corporations right of removal to cases in which venue is based only upon that specific paragraph; accordingly, the trial court erred in allowing a domestic motor carrier corporation to remove a wrongful death action against it to the county where its principal place of business was located, because venue against defendant was also proper in the county where the tort occurred under O.C.G.A. § 40-1-117 (b), the Georgia Motor Carrier Act.

  • Anderson v. Lewis, et al.

    Publication Date: 2018-01-11
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Motor Vehicle Torts | Personal Injury
    Industry:
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Allen Bodiford (Attorney at Law), Stockbridge, for appellant.
    for defendant: Russell Davis, Michael Patterson (Downey & Cleveland, LLP), Marietta, for appellee. Ashley Howard (Lynn Leonard & Associates), Atlanta, for other party.
    Case Number: A17A1898

    In an automobile accident case, the dismissal of one defendant due to plaintiff's failure to perfect service on him did not constitute an adjudication on the merits and provided no basis for granting summary judgment for the other defendant, the first defendant's grandfather, as the dismissal was not fatal to the derivative liability claim under the family purpose doctrine.

  • Wingler et al. v. White et al.

    Publication Date: 2017-12-18
    Practice Area: Government | Motor Vehicle Torts
    Industry:
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Presiding Judge Barnes
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: William Lanham, Clark McGehee (Johnson & Ward), Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Derrick Bingham, Melissa Reading, W. Jones (Owen, Gleaton, Egan, Jones & Sweeney, LLP), Atlanta; Adam Ford (Page Law LLC), Marietta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A17A1549

    The trial court erred in granting summary judgment to sheriff in plaintiffs' suit arising after they were injured when a suspect who was fleeing law enforcement crashed a vehicle into their car because, construing the evidence in favor of plaintiffs, genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether sheriff's deputies acted with reckless disregard for proper law enforcement procedures in continuing the high-speed chase.

  • City of Macon et al. v. Brown

    Publication Date: 2017-11-15
    Practice Area: Motor Vehicle Torts
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Judge Bethel
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Corrie Holton, Lauren Schultz (James Bates Brannan Groover LLP), Macon; William Noland (Noland Law Firm, LLC), Macon, for appellant.
    for defendant: Mark Martin, George Williams (Attorney at Law), Warner Robins, for appellee.
    Case Number: A17A1066

    The trial court erred in denying defendants' motion for summary judgment in plaintiff's suit alleging that defendants were liable for damages for failing to maintain a public roadway that caused a collision because plaintiff's evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to create a genuine issue of fact as to whether defendants had constructive notice of the alleged defect.