Foley v. Shanahan, 211 S.E.2d 367 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974). · Go Syfert
Search
Foley v. Shanahan, 211 S.E.2d 367 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 6× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 2008 · 2 courts · …piece-meal review is not favored by the courts. at p. 262 ✓
36 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: First Christ Holiness Church, Inc. v. Owens Temple First Christ Holiness Church, Inc. (ga, 2008-01-08)
Treatment trajectory · 1974 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1974 2000 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (quoted) First Christ Holiness Church, Inc. v. Owens Temple First Christ Holiness Church, Inc. (4×) also: Cited "see"
Ga. · 2008 · signal: see · quote attribution · 3 verbatim quotes · confidence high
piece-meal review is not favored by the courts.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Head v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
Ga. Ct. App. · 1997 · confidence medium
In Blanchard v. Westview Cemetery, 133 Ga. App. 262, 263-264 (1) ( 211 SE2d 135 ), this Court held that even where the evidence may demand a finding that defendant is liable to plaintiff, a verdict in the amount found by the jury is not demanded and the trial court has the discretion to grant a new trial even though the jury verdict does not suggest bias and prejudice on the part of the jury.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Branton v. Draper Corp.
Ga. Ct. App. · 1988 · confidence medium
See generally OCGA § 51-12-4; Blanchard v. Westview Cemetery, 133 Ga. App. 262, 269 ( 211 SE2d 135 ), as modified 234 Ga. 540 ( 216 SE2d 776 ); Old Dominion Freight Line v. Martin, 153 Ga. App. 135 ( 264 SE2d 585 ) (medical expenses).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Sheppard v. Tribble Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc.
Ga. Ct. App. · 1982 · confidence medium
The additional damages referred to are those damages contained in § 105-2001 and § 105-2003____There can be no recovery of exemplary damages under § 105-2002 unless there is a recovery of compensatory damages under § 105-2001 or § 105-2003.” Blanchard v. Westview Cemetery, 133 Ga. App. 262, 270 ( 211 SE2d 135 ) (1974).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Pilkenton v. Eubanks
Ga. Ct. App. · 1976 · confidence medium
Moreover, in such cases, a recovery is allowed only where there is a wilful and *674 intentional tort.” Blanchard v. Westview Cemetery, 133 Ga. App. 262, 269 (10) ( 211 SE2d 135 ) (1974) (Judgment modified on other grounds, 234 Ga. 540 ( 216 SE2d 776 ) (1975)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Greer v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.
Ga. Ct. App. · 1976 · confidence medium
In Blanchard v. Westview Cemetery, Inc., 133 Ga. App. 262, 269 ( 211 SE2d 135 ), this court held that Code § 105-2003 applies only "where the entire injury is to the peace, feelings or happiness. 'Entire injury’ means there is no injury to the 'person or purse’...
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Speer v. Gemco Elevator Co. (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 1975 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Warren v. Mann, 117 Ga. App. 787 (2, 3) ( 161 SE2d 894 ); Hunt v. Denby, 128 Ga. App. 523 (4) ( 197 SE2d 489 ); Blanchard v. Westview Cemetery, 133 Ga. App. 262, 263 (1) ( 211 SE2d 135 ) and cases cited.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Florida East Coast Properties, Inc. v. Davis
Ga. Ct. App. · 1975 · confidence medium
See Edgeman v. Thomas, 132 Ga. App. 866 (1) ( 209 SE2d 658 ); Blanchard v. Westview Cemetery, 133 Ga. App. 262, 263 (1) ( 211 SE2d 135 ). 6.
cited Cited "see" Kelley v. Austell Building Supply, Inc.
Ga. Ct. App. · 1982 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blanchard v. Westview Cemetery, 133 Ga. App. 262 ( 211 SE2d 135 ); Westview Cemetery v. Blanchard, 234 Ga. 540, 546 ( 216 SE2d 776 ).
discussed Cited "see" Wilkinson v. Davis
Ga. Ct. App. · 1979 · signal: see · confidence high
See Code § 105-2002, and in this connection the cases of Blanchard v. Westview Cemetery, Inc., 124 Ga. App. 195, 199-211 ( 183 SE2d 399 ), s.c., 228 Ga. 461 ( 186 SE2d 92 ), s.c., 133 Ga. App. 262, 265 (3), 269-272 ( 211 SE2d 135 ), s.c., 234 Ga. 540 ( 216 SE2d 776 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
FOLEY Et Al.
v.
SHANAHAN Et Al.; And Vice Versa
49852, 50036.
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Nov 7, 1974.
211 S.E.2d 367
Wm. Lewis Spearman, for appellants., Arnall, Golden & Gregory, ElliottH. Levitas, Thomas R. Todd, Jr., for appellees.
Clark, Bell, Quillian.
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published
1 passages pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 92%
Citer courts: Supreme Court of Georgia (3)
Clark, Judge.

1. Piece-meal review is not favored by the courts. "[I]n the absence of an express determination by the court that there is no just reason for delay and an express direction for entry of judgment, no order or decision which adjudicates with respect to fewer than all the claims or all the parties is final or appealable. [Code Ann. § 81A-154 and cits.].

"Since there is no appeal from a final, appealable judgment in the record and no certificate for immediate review as provided for by Code Ann. § 6-701 (a, 2) this appeal must be dismissed under authority of the above cases.” Rodriguez v. Newby, 130 Ga. App. 139, 140 (202 SE2d 565).

2. In view of the dismissal of the main appeal, it is unnecessary to consider the cross appeal.

Appeals dismissed.

Bell, C. J., and Quillian, J., concur.