• Peruta v. County of San Diego

    Publication Date: 2014-02-14
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2014-02-13
    Court: 9th Cir.
    Judge: Before: O'SCANNLAIN, THOMAS, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Paul D. Clement, Bancroft PLLC, Washington, D.C., argued the cause for the plaintiffs-appellants. Carl D. Michel, Michel & Associates, P.C., Long Beach, California, filed the briefs for the plaintiffs-appellants. With him on the opening brief were Glenn S. McRoberts, Sean A. Brady, and Bobbie K. Ross, Michel & Associates, P.C., Long Beach, California. With him on the reply brief were Glenn S. McRoberts, Sean A. Brady, and Bobbie K. Ross, Michel & Associates, P.C., Long Beach, California, and Paul Neuharth, Jr., Paul Neuharth, Jr. APC., San Diego, California.
    for defendant: James M. Chapin, Senior Deputy Attorney for County of San, San Diego, California, argued the cause and filed the brief for the defendants-appellees. With him on the brief was Thomas E. Montgomery, County Counsel for County of San Diego, San Diego, California.

    Case Number: No. 10-56971

    Cite as 14 C.D.O.S. 1524 EDWARD PERUTA; MICHELLE LAXSON; JAMES DODD; LESLIE BUNCHER, D

  • December 12, 2013 |

    Roberts v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

     Click Here for FC&S Legal Expert Analysis Robertsv. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.2013 WL 1233268Only the Westlaw citation is currently available.United…

    1 minute read

  • October 23, 2013 | Daily Report Online

    Med-Mal Board Would Be Constitutional, Says Former AG Thurbert Baker

    A former state attorney general told state senators Tuesday a bill that would replace Georgia's medical malpractice tort system with a workers' compensation-like board is constitutio

    1 minute read

  • Safeway Ins. Co. v. Hanks

    Publication Date: 2013-08-28
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Boggs, Michael P.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jason Darneille and Anne Gower Crim & Bassler LLP, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Angel Figueredo Figueredo Law Offices LLC, Roswell, for appellee.

    Case Number: A13A1215

    The trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the plaintiff's radiology expert to testify about the plaintiff's back injury without requiring proof that the car accident at issue caused t

  • Norred v. Teaver

    Publication Date: 2013-04-01
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Boggs, Michael P.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert Wright Katz Stepp Wright & Fleming LLC, Decatur, for appellant.
    for defendant: Richard Tisinger Tisinger,Vance PC, Carrollton, for appellees.

    Case Number: A12A2413

    O.C.G.A. § 9-3-72—which provides a 1-year statute of limitation for medical malpractice actions based on foreign objects left in a patient's body—applies to objects intentionally left in a patient'

  • Laskar v. Board of Regents of the Univ. Sys. of Ga.

    Publication Date: 2013-03-25
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge:
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Craig Frankel, LeAnne Gilbert Gaslowitz Frankel LLC, and Robert Marcovitch Weinberg Wheeler Hudgins Gunn & Dial LLC, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Samuel S. Olens, Attorney General, and Julia Anderson, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Atlanta, for appellees.

    Case Number: A12A1831

    The trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the appel petition for writ of certiorari challenging a decision by the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia upholding the appe

  • Rawls v. State

    Publication Date: 2012-05-25
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Doyle, Sara L.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: harles Frier, Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Paul L. Howard Jr., District Attorney, Arthur Walton, Assistant District Attorney, and Joshua Morrison District Attorney's Office, Atlanta, for appellee.

    Case Number: A12A0093

    The trial court did not violate O.C.G.A. § 17-8-57 by questioning a witness regarding venue, as the colloquy at issue merely involved questions about the locations of events and did not refer to whe

  • City of Atlanta v. Benator

    Publication Date: 2011-07-22
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Smith, George T.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Laurance J. Warco, John H. Fleming, Allegra J. Lawrence-Hardy Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan, Laura Sauriol-Gibris City of Atlanta Law Dep't, John M. Parsons and Amanda M. Conley Parsons Law Group, Atlanta, for the city of Atlanta. Edward A. Webb, Matthew C. Klase Webb, Klase & Lemond, John M. Parsons and William L. Pratt, Atlanta, for Benator. Alfred B. Adams III, Vernon M. Strickland Holland & Knight LLP and Rodney K. Strong Griffin & Strong PC, Atlanta, for K & V Meter Automation. Rodney K. Strong Griffin & Strong PC, Atlanta, for Metals & Materials Engineers. Other party representation: Kimberly R. Ward Holland & Knight, Theodore Freeman, T. Bart Gary, Jacob E. Daly Freeman, Mathis & Gary LLP, William L. Pratt, Atlanta.
    for defendant:

    Case Number: A11A0769; A11A0770; A11A0771; A11A0772

    In a case of first impression, the Court held that ante litem notice must be provided separately for each named plaintiff in a class action la

  • March 14, 2011 |

    April 2011 Dec Page

    The Dec Page offers a question of the month based on articles found in the FC&S Bulletins. Also presented are court decisions from around the country dealing with insurance coverage issues. Other insurance related news can also be noted here.

    1 minute read

  • Smith v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-11-12
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Adams, A. Harris
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Charles E. W. Barrow, Athens, for appellant.
    for defendant: William K. Wynne Jr., District Attorney, Covington, and Walter C. Howard District Attorney's Office, Monroe, for appellee.

    Case Number: A10A1014

    The trial court did not violate O.C.G.A. § 17-8-57, after the defense put venue into question, when the trial judge instructed the state to call another witness, limited the scope of that witnesses'