 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Eason v. State, A06A2435.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, February 13, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the prosecutor's reference in front of the jury to defendant taking the stand was improper, neither prong of the Smith test was satisfied, and a reversal was not required on defendant's claim that the State infringed upon his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. The prosecutor was arguing a plausible evidentiary objection.
|
|||||
| Haywood v. State, A06A1350.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, February 13, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When defendant was charged with statutory rape and child molestation in violation of O.C.G.A. §§ 16-6-3 and 16-6-4, the trial court properly excluded any evidence showing that defendant believed that the victim was over the age of consent. Knowledge of the victim's age was not an element of either statute.
|
|||||
| Tubbs v. State, A06A2458.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, February 13, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in admitting a copy of defendant's fingerprint card, pursuant to O.C.G.A. §§ 24-3-14 and 24-5-26, despite his claim that the testifying witness lacked personal knowledge about the creation or transmission of the same, as the card spoke for itself, and was handled in the gathering agency's regular course of business.
|
|||||
| Washington v. State, A06A2189.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, February 13, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a prosecution for the felony possession of tools for the commission of a crime, while the evidence presented was sufficient to support the verdict, because defendant could have been charged with misdemeanor possession of a drug-related object under the rule of lenity, his conviction of the felony was reversed, and a resentencing was ordered.
|
|||||
| Ga. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Pawlowski, A06A2011,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, February 14, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court erred in denying summary judgment to an insurer in an action by insureds. The homeowners' policy contained a one-year limitation period for bringing suit, and the insurer had not waived this period through fraudulent inducement merely by investigating the claim and offering a settlement that the insureds rejected as insufficient.
|
|||||
| Bennett v. State, A06A1903.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, February 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A DUI roadblock was not unconstitutional. The lieutenant who implemented it had testified that he was a supervisor with the authority to do so, and the purposes of the roadblock, to check for seatbelt violations and for DUI offenders, were permissible; the fact that it was set as part of a statewide campaign did not mitigate his authority.
|
|||||
| Brown v. Coast Dental of Ga., P.C., A06A2037.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, February 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A dental patient's malpractice suit was time-barred under O.C.G.A. § 9-3-71 (a). Although the patient had complained of pain and sensitivity at an appointment on January 25, 2001, she admitted experiencing those symptoms from the time bridges were installed on January 3, 2001, and logic indicated that she had had symptoms before her appointment.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of K.C.R., A06A2156.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, February 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order terminating a father's parental rights was reversed, as clear and convincing evidence was lacking that such was in the child's best interest, the father caused the child's deprivation, and that continued deprivation would cause or likely cause serious physical, mental, emotional, or moral harm to the child.
|
|||||
| Paul v. Smith, Gambrell & Russell, A06A2135, A06A2136.,
COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA, February 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a legal malpractice suit, the trial court properly denied summary judgment to a law firm on a document preparation claim. There was evidence that the firm had failed to effectuate a merger properly, and the effects of such a failure on a nonconsenting shareholder could not be said to be within the clients' knowledge as a matter of law.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
