Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Get alerted any time new stories match your search criteria. Create an alert to follow a developing story, keep current on a competitor, or monitor industry news.
Thank You!
Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
How To Use Search Constraints
Categorical
judge:"Steven Andrews"
court:Florida
topic:"Civil Appeals"
practicearea:Lobbying
Boolean
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation
"Steven Andrews" OR "Roger Dalton"
Litigation NOT "Roger Dalton"
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation NOT Florida
Combinations
(Florida OR Georgia) judge:"Steven Andrews"
((Florida AND Georgia) OR Texas) topic:"Civil Appeals"
Publication Date: 2024-12-04 Practice Area:Family Law | Immigration Law Industry: Court:Georgia Court of Appeals Judge:Judge Rickman Attorneys:For plaintiff: Rebeca Salmon, (Attorney at Law), Norcross, for appellant. for defendant: Cody Whetsel, Elberton, for appellee; Christopher Carr Bryan Webb, (Attorney General), Atlanta, T. Fleming, (Hunter, Maclean, Exley & Dunn, P.C.), Savannah, Emily Harris, (Department of Law), Atlanta, for AM. Case Number: A24A0613
Court reverses and remands adverse dependency and Special Immigrant Juvenile findings for unaccompanied minor who sought adjustment of his dependency status
Interlocutory Discovery Order Directed to Disinterested Third Party Not Subject to Party's Direct Appeal Where Claimed Privacy Interests Were Not Collateral to Other Issues in Case
Court dismisses appeal to an administrative panel's dismissal of a Lemon Law claim because claimants filed a direct appeal and failed to follow discretionary appeal procedures
Court affirms that sovereign immunity bars plaintiffs' challenge to a land swap agreement between a county and a private party, and remands with instructions to dismiss the plaintiffs' case
Court affirms convictions for fobbery and identity fraud over defendant's challenges to sufficiency and admission of evidence, failure to apply rule of lenity, and repugnant verdicts
Court affirms fraud judgment and jury damages award against car dealership and its owner, rejecting their evidentiary contentions and challenge to piercing the corporate veil