Get above the noise
Log in for answers tailored to you — saved chats, your topics, and the full IJR suite.
Judge, Supreme Court of Georgia
Jordan v. Moses
Supreme Court of Georgia · 2012-05-07 · cited 11×
In Jordan v. Moses, two attorneys formed a partnership for an indefinite term in 2003; one partner sought to dissolve it in 2006 while the other did not consent, leading the first partner to file a declaratory judgment action and the second to counterclaim for wrongful dissolution of the partnership. The trial court granted summary judgment to the dissolving partner on the counterclaim, but the Court of Appeals reversed. The Supreme Court of Georgia granted certiorari and determined that the Court of Appeals had applied an incorrect legal standard for the tort of wrongful dissolution by requiring an attempt to appropriate only the "new prosperity" of the partnership. Instead, the Court clarified that under its precedent in Wilensky v. Blalock, the claim can rest on bad-faith appropriation of the partnership's existing or continuing prosperity without adequate compensation, and it reversed and remanded for analysis under that standard.
business & regulatorytorts & liability
Jett v. Jett
Supreme Court of Georgia · 2012-05-07 · cited 7×
This case involved a dispute over enforcement of a divorce settlement agreement requiring the husband to sell the marital residence or refinance it after two years and divide the net proceeds or equity equally with the wife. The trial court found the husband in contempt for failing to refinance, ordered him to pay down the mortgage using other assets, and required him to indemnify the wife against any deficiency. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the contempt finding, as evidence showed the husband's voluntary new debts prevented compliance, but reversed portions of the order that assigned all deficiency risk to the husband or mandated liquidation of assets to pay down the mortgage. The Court reasoned that while a trial court may interpret and enforce a decree in contempt proceedings, it lacks authority to modify the underlying agreement by altering the equal-division terms or imposing new obligations not contemplated by the parties.
family lawprocedure
Scott v. State
Supreme Court of Georgia · 2012-04-24 · cited 130×
Nathaniel Scott was convicted of malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony after fatally shooting Edward Nurse at a gas station in Atlanta. On appeal, Scott raised multiple challenges including insufficient evidence, improper prosecutorial statements in closing argument, errors in jury instructions on alibi and aggravated assault, an improper Allen charge, and ineffective assistance of counsel. The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdicts under the Jackson v. Virginia standard, that any unobjected-to arguments were waived and fell within permissible bounds, that the jury instructions were adequate, and that the remaining claims lacked merit. The opinion addresses procedural defaults and the scope of prosecutorial latitude in summation without reversing on any ground.
criminal lawguns
Hawkins v. State
Supreme Court of Georgia · 2012-03-23 · cited 23×
This case involved the arrest of Haley Hawkins for drug-related crimes after she exchanged text messages with an undercover officer. The arresting officer searched her cell phone without a warrant and retrieved the text messages, which Hawkins sought to suppress. The court decided that the search was lawful as incident to arrest. The reasoning was that a cell phone is analogous to a traditional container that can be searched for evidence relevant to the crime, and the search was appropriately limited to the text messages in question.
criminal lawprocedure
Roberts v. Deal
Supreme Court of Georgia · 2012-03-19 · cited 7×
This case involved elected members of the Warren County Board of Education who were removed from office by the Governor after an administrative hearing found they violated state ethics rules under OCGA § 45-10-3. The superior court denied their petition for review, and they appealed. The Georgia Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as moot for one appellant whose term had expired but reversed the denial for the others, holding that OCGA § 45-10-3 applies only to boards created by general statute and not to county boards of education, which are established by the state constitution under Article VIII, Section V, Paragraph II; therefore, the Governor lacked authority under OCGA § 45-10-4 to remove them.
electionsprocedure
Barker v. Barrow
Supreme Court of Georgia · 2012-03-19 · cited 15×
In Barker v. Barrow, a criminal defendant sought habeas corpus relief after his 1996 recidivist sentence of life without parole, arguing that trial and appellate counsel were ineffective for failing to investigate the constitutional validity of his prior guilty pleas, which the State used for sentencing enhancement under OCGA §§ 16-13-30(d) and 17-10-7(c). The habeas court initially granted relief on some prior convictions but the Georgia Supreme Court remanded for consideration of procedural default and ineffectiveness claims under Strickland v. Washington. On remand, the habeas court denied relief, finding no deficient performance by counsel, and the Supreme Court affirmed. The Court reasoned that counsel had no absolute duty to obtain and review transcripts of all prior plea proceedings, that counsel reasonably investigated the convictions based on available information and experience with the sentencing court, and that Barker failed to overcome the presumption of reasonable professional conduct. The topics are criminal law and procedure.
criminal lawprocedure