Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Anthony Threatt was tried by jury and convicted of felony murder in the commission of an armed robbery, unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, all in connection with the fatal shooting of Robert Gresham. Threatt appealed, contending the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions. The Supreme Court found no problem with the legal sufficiency of the evidence, but found that the trial court imposed a sentence that the law did not allow for unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Accordingly, the Court vacated that portion of the sentence, remanded for resentencing. The Court affirmed the trial court in all other respects. View "Threatt v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The Supreme Court granted certiorari to the Court of Appeals in these cases involving assignment of tort liability to entities who were not parties to the suit. Upon review, the Court found that the Court of Appeals erred by holding that admissions concerning the nonparties found in the pleadings and elsewhere did not constitute evidence for the purpose of summary judgment, and erred in applying the "right for any reason" rule. Accordingly the Court reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings. View "Georgia-Pacific, LLC v. Fields" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, the trial court entered a final judgment and decree of divorce for the parties. The jury found that Husband's gross monthly income was $10,833.00 and found that Wife's gross monthly income was zero. These findings resulted in a presumptive child support amount of $1,663 per month for the parties' two minor children who lived with Wife. Upon calculating the presumptive amount of child support, Wife made an additional argument to the jury, requesting an upward deviation of the presumptive child support amount. The jury deliberated further and made an upward deviation of $337 such that the final child support award was $2,000 per month. Wife moved for a new trial, contending the verdict was unsupported by the evidence because the jury failed to include income from fringe benefits Husband received from his employer in its finding of Husband's gross monthly income. She argued the jury's failure to include income from fringe benefits in its finding of Husband's gross monthly income resulted in an erroneous calculation of the presumptive child support amount. After a hearing, the trial court denied Wife's motion for new trial and the Supreme Court granted Wife's application for discretionary review pursuant to Rule 34 (4). Upon careful consideration of the trial court record, the Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's denial of Wife's motion for new trial. View "Breedlove v. Breedlove" on Justia Law

Babies Right Start, Inc. ("BRS") appealed a trial court's order denying its claims for mandamus, injunctive, and declaratory relief against BRS's one-year administrative disqualification from participation in a federal benefits program administered by the State. However, the disqualification period ended almost a year ago, rendering moot the relief that BRS requested; BRS did not seek an award of damages (other than attorney fees) in the trial court; and this case did not fall within the narrow exception to mootness for disputes that are capable of repetition, yet evade judicial review. The Supreme Court vacated the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for dismissal. View "Babies Right Start, Inc. v. Georgia Dept. of Pub. Health" on Justia Law

George and Catherine Dickens appealed the City of Statesboro's Zoning Board of Appeals denial of their application to construct a 2,160-square-foot detached garage on their property. The Dickenses then filed a petition for mandamus and damages at superior court to compel the City to issue their building permit. The City moved for summary judgment, which the superior court summarily denied. The trial court issued a certificate of immediate review, and the City applied for interlocutory appeal. Because the Dickenses were required to seek judicial review at superior court by way of a petition for a writ of certiorari rather than a petition for mandamus, the Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded the case back to the trial court for dismissal. View "City of Statesboro v. Dickens" on Justia Law

Following a jury trial, Walter Bell was found guilty of first degree vehicular homicide, reckless driving, hit and run, and tampering with evidence in connection with the death of Jenny McMillan-Gutierrez. On appeal he contended, among other things, that OCGA 40-6-270 (a) and 40-8-76.1 (d) were unconstitutional. Finding no merit to these contentions, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Bell v. Georgia " on Justia Law

Amin Dennis was convicted by jury of malice murder, kidnapping with bodily injury, and other crimes in connection with the deaths of Jerry Lee Lawrence and Harold Reese, Jr. On appeal, Dennis contended that he did not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily make his statement to police. Because the trial court correctly ruled that Dennis’s statement was voluntary and admissible, the Supreme Court affirmed the convictions. View "Dennis v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The Supreme Court granted interlocutory appeal by caveators to determine the validity of the self-proving affidavit attached to the testator's will. The Court found that the affidavit did not substantially comply with the requirements of a self-proving affidavit under OCGA 53-4-24. Accordingly, the Court reversed the superior court's conclusion which held otherwise. View "Martina v. Elrod" on Justia Law

Trip Network, Inc. and several other online travel companies appealed a superior court judgment dismissing their petition for a writ of mandamus. The companies were defendants in a civil suit filed by the City of Atlanta. The City sought to recover hotel-occupancy taxes, but the case was dismissed when the trial court concluded the City did not exhaust its administrative remedies. The City appealed and the Supreme Court reversed. Atlanta then sued the companies in superior court for back taxes and a permanent injunction to require the companies to collect hotel-occupancy taxes from hotel guests. In response to cross-motions for summary judgment, the superior court ordered the injunction and granted summary judgment to the companies on the back taxes issue. As part of the ruling, the Supreme Court found the trial court had not ruled on the City's claim for conversion. Following the issuance of the remittitur, the superior court ordered the parties to brief the court on whether any claims remained pending and how such claims should have been concluded. The companies argued that after the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling, the case was closed, and sought the writ of mandamus to effectively close the case. The Supreme Court concluded that mandamus was not the appropriate remedy for the travel companies to resolve this matter, and that the trial court properly dismissed their petition. View "Trip Network, Inc. v. Dempsey" on Justia Law

Appellant Benjamin Brown was convicted of felony murder, aggravated assault and possession of a knife during the commission of a felony in connection with the stabbing death of Ron Williams. Appellant’s motion for new trial was denied, and he appealed that decision and his conviction. Appellant argued that his trial counsel was ineffective under the standards set forth in "Strickland v. Washington," (466 U. S. 668). Specifically, appellant claimed his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance in failing to locate and call a witness allegedly material to appellant's self-defense claim. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Brown v. Georgia" on Justia Law