Filter This View

  • Note Purchase Co. of Ga. LLC v. Brenda Lee Strickland Realty Inc.

    Publication Date: 2002-11-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Shawn M. Winterich The Winterich Law Firm LLC, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Ashoo N. Sharma Weissman, Nowack, Curry & Wilco PC, Atlanta, and Reginald L. Winfrey Walker & Waldrop LLP, Conyers, for appellee.
    Case Number: A07A1217

    A hearing is required in order to enter an award of attorneys'

  • Fulton County Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Butner

    Publication Date: 2002-11-01
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Barnes, Anne Elizabeth
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ronald J. Freeman, Thomas A. Cox Jr. and Maureen M. McLeod Johnson, Freeman & Perkins-Hooper LLC, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Paul L. Hanes, Atlanta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A02A0937

    The trial court erred in awarding attorneys' fees to plaintiff in her tax assessment appeal without conducting a he

  • Kwickie Flash Foods Inc. v. Lakeside Petroleum Inc.

    Publication Date: 2002-08-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Mikell, Charles B.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Douglas L. Gibson Gibson & Spivey, Waycross, for appellant.
    for defendant: Robert D. Schoen, Atlanta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A02A0841

    Evidence that defendant violated its lease agreement by abandoning the leased premises in the middle of the night and trashing the leased store supported an award of bad faith attorneys'

  • Doman v. Stapleton

    Publication Date: 2002-07-12
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Blackburn, G. Alan
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Paul S. Weiner, Jonesboro, for appellant.
    for defendant: James T. McDonald Jr. Swift, Currie, McGhee & Hiers, and Terry O. Brantley Kennon, Parker, Duncan & Key, Atlanta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A02A0742

    Although the issue of an attorney's entitlement to his fees under a contingency agreement had been addressed in an arbitration award, res judicata did not bar subsequent arbitration to determine the

  • Lawrence v. Direct Mortgage Lenders Corp.

    Publication Date: 2002-04-26
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Andrews, Gary Blaylock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Alexander P. LeVorse, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: George L. Kimel and S. Robert Hahn, Norcross, for appellee.
    Case Number: A01A2313

    Trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to continue trial to allow defendant to commence discovery since defendant made no effort to conduct discovery after the filing of the complaint,

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Library of California Employment Law Forms

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Henry v. Swift, Currie, McGhee & Hiers, McGhee & Hiers LLP

    Publication Date: 2002-04-19
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Phipps, Herbert E.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Christopher L. Casey J. Hue Henry PC, and Regina M. Quick, Athens, for appellant.
    for defendant: in case number A01A2304. Kristine B. Morain, H. Lane Young II, Debra E. LeVorse and Carl H. Anderson Jr. Hawkins & Parnell, Atlanta, for appellees in A01A2304. H. Lane Young II and Debra E. LeVorse Hawkins & Parnell, Atlanta, for appellant in case number A02A0450. Wade K. Copeland Webb, Carlock, Copeland, Semler & Stair, Atlanta, Christopher L. Casey J. Hue Henry PC, and Regina M. Quick, Athens, for appellee in case number A02A0450.
    Case Number: A01A2304; A02A0450

    Attorney's memorandum summarizing conversations he had with opposing counsel that allegedly demonstrated that a personal animus towards the attorney's client motivated opposing counsel to seek attor

  • Gamlins, Solicitors & Notaries v. A. E. Roberts and Assocs. Inc.

    Publication Date: 2002-04-05
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jeffrey L. Sakas, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Mark L. Golder and Lynn Carroll Siegel & Golder PC, Atlanta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A01A2544

    The statute of limitation for a suit on account expired without proper service where plaintiff's first attempt at service was defective and plaintiff's later attempt to serve the defendant under O.C

  • Joel v. Chastain

    Publication Date: 2002-03-29
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Andrews, Gary Blaylock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Martin H. Rubin and David C. Joel, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Warren R. Hinds, Roswell, for appellee.
    Case Number: A01A2501

    Evidence that defendant's inadequately supervised employee falsely represented himself to be an attorney and settled plaintiff's case without her consent supported the jury's award of mental distres

  • Hipes & Norton PC v. Pye Auto. Sales of Chattanooga Inc.

    Publication Date: 2002-03-22
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Doyle, John J.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jere C. Smith and Bart W. Reed Moore, Ingram, Johnson & Steele LLP, Marietta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Gregory H. Kinnamon McDonald, Kinnamon & Thames, Dalton, for appellees.
    Case Number: A02A0290

    Plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment in its suit to recover outstanding legal fees and costs under the parties' retainer agreement since plaintiff provided the signed retainer agreement and d

  • Dikeman v. Mary A. Stearns PC

    Publication Date: 2002-03-01
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Miller, M. Yvette
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Vincent D. Sowerby, Brunswick, for appellant.
    for defendant: Mary A. Stearns and Christy E. Draper, Marietta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A01A2455

    The trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to compel plaintiff to comply with defendant's overbroad and oppressive discovery request which invaded the privacy expectations of plaintiff