Georgia Ports Auth. v. Andre Rickmers Schiffsbeteiligungsges mbH & Co. KG, 612 S.E.2d 927 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005). · Go Syfert
Search
Georgia Ports Auth. v. Andre Rickmers Schiffsbeteiligungsges mbH & Co. KG, 612 S.E.2d 927 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" MATTHEW WILLIAMS, III v. GEORGIA PORTS AUTHORITY (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
However, “the Eleventh Amendment does not bar actions for damages against state officials in their individual capacities, which seek recovery from the officials’ personal funds.” Georgia Ports Auth. v. Andre Rickmers Schiffsbeteiligungsges mbH & Co. KG, 262 Ga. App. 591, 595 (4) ( 585 SE2d 883 ) (2003), overruled on other grounds by Hines v. Georgia Ports Auth., 278 Ga. 631 ( 604 SE2d 189 ) (2004)4; see Georgia Ports Auth. v. Andre Rickmers Schiffsbeteiligungsges mbH & Co. KG, 272 Ga. App. 638 ( 612 SE2d 927 ) (2005); see also Alden v. Maine, 527 U. S. 706, 757 (III) ( 119 SCt 2240 , 114…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
GEORGIA PORTS AUTHORITY
v.
ANDRE RICKMERS SCHIFFSBETEILIGUNGSGES MBH & COMPANY KG GEORGIA PORTS AUTHORITY v. HINES
A03A0190; A03A0191.
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Apr 5, 2005.
612 S.E.2d 927
Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, Kathleen M. Pacious, George S. Zier, Assistant Attorneys General, Ranitz, Mahoney, Mahoney & Moss, Thomas J. Mahoney, Jr., Mary K. Moss, for Georgia Ports Authority et al., Jones, Boykin, Stacy & Associates, Noble L. Boykin, Jr., Hunter, Maclean, Exley & Dunn, Marc G. Marling, David F Sipple, Robert S. Glenn, Jr., Colin A. McRae, Clark & Clark, Fred S. Clark, for Hines et al. and Andre Rickmers Schiffsbeteiligungsges mbH & Co. KG.
Phipps.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
Phipps, Judge.

In combined cases Hines v. Ga. Ports Auth. and Ga. Ports Auth. v. Andre Rickmers Schiffsbeteiligungsges mbH & Co. KG,1 the Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that the Georgia Ports Authority was not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity from federal maritime claims and reversed the judgment of this court in Divisions 1, 2, 3 and 5 (a) of combined cases Ga. Ports Auth. v. Andre Rickmers Schiffsbeteiligungsges mbH & Co. KG and Ga. Ports Auth. v. Hines.2 Therefore, we vacate Divisions 1, 2, 3 and 5 (a) of our earlier opinion, adopt the opinion of the Supreme Court as our own, and affirm the judgments of the trial court in toto. Divisions 4 and 5 (b) of our earlier opinion were not addressed by the Supreme Court and therefore those divisions still stand.

Judgments affirmed.

Blackburn, P. J., and Ellington, J., concur.