Filter This View

  • In the Interest of B. N. A.

    Publication Date: 2001-03-30
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Ruffin, John H.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael J. Tuck, Chatsworth, for appellant.
    for defendant: Thurbert E. Baker Jr., Attorney General, Dennis R. Dunn, Deputy Attorney General, William C. Joy, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Shalen S. Nelson, Laura W. Hyman, Assistant Attorney Generals, and Cynthia N. Johnson Waycaster, Johnson, Morris & Dean, Atlanta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A00A1933

    The juvenile court erred in terminating the putative father's parental rights because DFACS never established a reunification plan and visitation schedule as or

  • Walker v. Walker

    Publication Date: 2001-03-23
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Andrews, Gary Blaylock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: William D. Walker, Albany, proceeded pro se. June P. S. Gamble, Albany, for appellee.
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A00A2153

    The trial court's order restraining the mother and father from calling each other's residence was incompatible with the mother's visitation r

  • Pope v. Board of Comm'rs of Fulton County

    Publication Date: 2001-03-23
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Barnes, Anne Elizabeth
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Timothy J. Sweeney and James P. Robertson Jr. Harman, Owen, Saunders & Sweeney PC, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: . Richard R. Gignilliat, J. Lewis Sapp Elarbee, Thompson & Trapnell, K. Prabhaker Reddy Reddy & Silvis LLC and Franklin N. Biggins, Atlanta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A00A2441

    The county was not an essential party to the petitioners' appeal of their removal from the county board of tax asse

  • Covington v. D. L. Pimper Group Inc.

    Publication Date: 2001-03-23
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Johnson, Edward H.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Scott M. Ratchick and Amy K. Alcoke Hunton & Williams, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: . Mark M. J. Webb and C. King Askew Brinson, Askew, Berry & Seigler, Rome, for appellee.
    Case Number: A01A0398

    Covenant restricting employee from soliciting clients of his former employer with whom he had contact during the two years prior to his resignation was reaso

  • Jones v. State

    Publication Date: 2001-03-23
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Charles S. Thornton Lawson & Thornton, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Paul L. Howard Jr., District Attorney, Jr., District Attorney, and George W. K. Snyder Jr., Assistant District Attorney, Atlanta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A00A2448

    The trial court failed to conduct the required 3-factor analysis to determine whether the state's forfeiture claim violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against excessive

  • Watkins v. State

    Publication Date: 2001-03-23
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Ruffin, John H.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Steven E. Phillips, Public Defender, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Paul L. Howard Jr., District Attorney, Bettieanne C. Hart, Deputy District Attorney, and George W. K. Snyder Jr., Senior Assistant District Attorney, Atlanta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A00A1959

    Defendant was not entitled to a directed verdict because he blocked the assault victim's avenue of escape and fled with the assa

  • Keenum v. State

    Publication Date: 2001-03-16
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Andrews, Gary Blaylock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: William C. Head, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Keith C. Martin, Solicitor, and Evelyn P. Sandefur, Assistant Solicitor, Jonesboro, for appellee.
    Case Number: A00A1982

    The officer's omission of a phrase while reading the implied consent notice for the second time did not negate or nullify his first wa

  • In the Interest of S.K. and F.K.

    Publication Date: 2001-03-16
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Pope, Marion T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Don T. Lyles, Thomasville, and James R. Smith Jr. Smith, Hannan & Parker PC, Valdosta, for appellant.
    for defendant: . Thurbert E. Baker Jr., Attorney General, Dennis R. Dunn, Deputy Attorney General, William C. Joy, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Shalen S. Nelson, Assistant Attorney General, Atlanta, and Daniel M. Mitchell Jr., Special Assistant Attorney General, Quitman, for appellee.
    Case Number: A00A2259, A00A2260

    The juvenile court had discretion under O.C.G.A. § 15-11-32 and 15-11-87 to deny the mother's motion for an independent psychological examination of the chi

  • Graff v. McReynolds & Assocs. PC-Profit Sharing Plan

    Publication Date: 2001-03-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Miller, M. Yvette
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kenneth L. Levy Zachary & Seagraves PA and John W. Lawson, Decatur, for appellant.
    for defendant: Larry S. McReynolds Smith, Howard & Ajax, John D. Sours, Mark D. Gropp Wasson, Sours & Harris PC, Atlanta, Timothy K. King Carl H. Hodges 7 Assocs., Jonesboro, and James D. Windham Windham, Hughes & Sauls PC, Morrow, for appellee.
    Case Number: A00A1869

    The plaintiff was not entitled to summary judgment against an individual defendant in its suit on a corporate note because the plaintiff did not allege the basis for defendant's personal liab

  • Crosby v. Kendall

    Publication Date: 2001-03-09
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Johnson, Edward H.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Louis K. Polonsky and Matthew D. Crosby, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Taylor W. Jones and Jenny E. Jensen Taylor W. Jones & Assocs., Atlanta, for appellees.
    Case Number: A00A2503

    Any error in the trial court's charge that an attorney acting as an escrow agent must meet the standards of the legal profession was harmless because the evidence demanded a finding that the defendi