Get above the noise
Log in for answers tailored to you — saved chats, your topics, and the full IJR suite.
In Re Cl
Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2012-03-30
The case involved a Georgia mother's appeal of a juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to two young sons, after the Department of Family and Children Services took custody due to the parents' substance abuse, repeated drug-related arrests, unstable housing, unemployment, and failure to comply with reunification plans. The Court of Appeals of Georgia affirmed the termination. It held that clear and convincing evidence supported findings that the children were deprived, the deprivation was likely to continue given the mother's ongoing drug issues, incomplete rehabilitation, incarcerations, and lack of progress on required steps like stable employment and housing, and that returning the children would likely cause harm due to their need for permanency. The boys had been in foster care for most of their lives, were thriving there, and had no meaningful ongoing relationship with the mother.
family law
Grave De Peralta v. Blackberry Mountain Ass'n
Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2012-03-29 · cited 5×
The case concerned whether neighborhood covenants in the Blackberry Mountain subdivision prohibited homeowners Ricardo and Tiffany Grave de Peralta from renting their home for short periods of a few days. The homeowners' association sued for a declaratory judgment and injunction, arguing that the fourth sentence of Section 6.01 required owners to designate in writing all persons entitled to use the property and limited such designations to no more than three changes per year without association consent, which would bar rentals shorter than about four months. The trial court denied the homeowners' motion for summary judgment, but the Court of Appeals reversed. It held that the designation requirement applies only to persons using the property "as Owners" under the third sentence of the section (which addresses parcels owned by entities or more than twelve individuals) and does not extend to short-term renters, who are treated separately as guests; any ambiguity in the covenants must be resolved in favor of the property owner's right to use the land for lawful purposes.
property
Speedway Motorsports, Inc. v. Pinnacle Bank
Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2012-03-29 · cited 18×
The case arose after Speedway Motorsports discovered that its consultant, David Blihovde, had defrauded it of more than $5 million between 2006 and 2010; Speedway then sued multiple recipients of the funds, including Pinnacle Bank, asserting claims for unjust enrichment, fraudulent transfers under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfers Act, constructive trusts, and equitable liens tied to a residence Blihovde bought with the proceeds and on which the Bank held and later foreclosed a security interest. The trial court dismissed the claims against the Bank and several other defendants for failure to state a claim. On appeal, the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissals in part and reversed in part, applying the standard that a complaint may be dismissed only if its allegations show with certainty that no set of provable facts could entitle the plaintiff to relief. The court held that Speedway’s allegations of the Bank’s constructive knowledge and lack of good faith were sufficient to survive dismissal on some claims, while other claims failed to overcome the Bank’s status as a bona fide purchaser for value.
business & regulatorypropertyproceduretorts & liability
Wellons, Inc. v. LANGBOARD, INC.
Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2012-03-27 · cited 15×
In this case, Wellons, Inc. contracted with Langboard, Inc. to design and install a custom energy system for a manufacturing plant, and Langboard sued Wellons for breach of both contracts after the system allegedly failed to meet performance and emissions requirements. A jury awarded Langboard more than $8.4 million in damages, and Wellons appealed, arguing that the design-contract claim was barred by a contractual one-year limitations period, that the evidence was insufficient to support damages on the installation contract, and that the trial court improperly admitted certain speculative evidence. The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment, holding that the limitations defense did not entitle Wellons to summary judgment because the record did not establish that Langboard’s claim had accrued more than a year before suit, that the damages award was supported by the evidence presented at trial, and that the challenged evidence was admissible. The court therefore upheld the jury’s verdict in full.
business & regulatoryprocedure
Reeves v. UPSON REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER
Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2012-03-21 · cited 27×
In Reeves v. Upson Regional Medical Center, a lawyer representing medical malpractice plaintiffs issued a subpoena for documents to a nonparty hospital, which moved to quash it as unreasonable and oppressive; after partial compliance and withdrawal of the subpoena, the trial court awarded the hospital over $23,000 in attorney fees and expenses under OCGA § 9-15-14(b), relying on the 2007 decision in Slone v. Myers. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the statute permits such awards only to parties and does not authorize awards to nonparties. The court overruled Slone as inconsistent with the statute’s plain language limiting recovery to “a party,” applied strict construction to this provision in derogation of the common law, and rejected policy arguments for expanding the remedy, noting that any broader relief would require legislative action. The opinion also confirmed appellate jurisdiction after addressing timeliness and filing issues.
proceduretorts & liabilityhealthcare
Bibb v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2012-03-21 · cited 11×
Lewis Shane Bibb was convicted by an Oconee County jury of four counts of aggravated child molestation and two counts of child molestation involving a preteen victim. He appealed, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support all four aggravated molestation convictions, that the trial court improperly admitted similar-transaction evidence, and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions in full. It held that the victim’s testimony describing Bibb’s repeated routine of sexual acts and the frequency of incidents during her time in Oconee County allowed a rational jury to find four qualifying acts. The court further ruled that evidence of Bibb’s prior sexual touching of the victim’s sister, his relationships with two teenage girls, and his collection of photographs of underage girls was properly admitted because it was offered for a proper purpose, sufficiently similar to the charged conduct, and not substantially more prejudicial than probative, especially under the liberal standard applied to sexual-offense cases.
criminal law