 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Alcovy Shores Water & Sewerage Auth. v. Jasper County, A05A1720.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly granted summary judgment to defendants as to a water authority's claims for declaratory relief and to enjoin defendants from encroaching on its territory, as a service agreement between defendants under the Service Delivery Act, O.C.G.A. § 36-70-20 et seq., did not limit the authority's territory.
|
|||||
| Ga. Power Co. v. Jones, A05A1575.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where condemnees planned bed and breakfast still had not opened at the time of the taking and had not earned any money, the trial court erred in allowing them to present evidence as to the value of the business as of the time of taking, because they were precluded from seeking business losses as a separate element of damages.
|
|||||
| Greene County Bd. of Comm'rs v. Higdon, A05A2084.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where county approved tax assessment of each property in county in order to pay for medical care for indigent patients, assessment did not violate due process and equal protection even though not all taxpayers benefitted. Question of benefit to each taxpayer was for legislature except in extraordinary cases, and instant case was not extraordinary.
|
|||||
| Meeks v. Thompson, A05A1739.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the father failed to dispute the stepfather's claim that father failed to pay $ 7,249 in support for daughter for at least a year before stepfather's adoption petition was filed, clear and convincing evidence supported finding that father had failed for over a year to provide for care and support of daughter under O.C.G.A. § 19-8-10(b)(2).
|
|||||
| N. Atlanta Scan Assocs. v. Dep't of Cmty. Health, A05A1668.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in affirming state community health department's administrative decision that ordered healthcare provider to cease operation until it obtained a certificate of need; the healthcare provider did not show an error of law was committed pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 50-13-1 et seq. in issuing that order.
|
|||||
| Perryman v. Lucas, A05A1891.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A tenant was properly served with a dispossessory warrant when it was tacked to his door and mailed to him by the sheriff, as actual notice was not required to satisfy due process in a dispossessory action, and the tack and mail method was reasonably calculated to apprise interested parties of the action and allowed the tenant to respond.
|
|||||
| Saadatdar v. State, A05A1650.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Fact that police officers asked permission to enter defendant's home several times, as they stood on the porch, and commented that neighbors could see them on the porch, did not make defendant's eventual consent to their entry involuntary.
|
|||||
| Webb v. State, A05A2335.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was accused of driving under the influence to the extent that it was less safe to drive, O.C.G.A. § 40-6-391(a)(1), testimony as to likelihood of blood/alcohol concentration for certain results obtained on horizontal gaze nystagmus test was relevant in such a case, and there was nothing inflammatory or misleading about evidence.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
