Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
12 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1953–2024 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Georgia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
McLendon v. Albany Warehouse Co.green2 sentences2015This Court granted the application on November 6, 2014, and Kingdom timely filed a notice of appeal thereafter. 1 *814 “[W]hen the trial judge conducts a hearing on a motion to dismiss or transfer for improper venue, his findings, as a trier of fact, are tested by the any evidence rule.” McLendon v. Albany Warehouse Co., 203 Ga. App. 865, 866 (1) ( 418 SE2d 130 ) (1992) (citation omitted). 2015This Court granted the application on November 6, 2014, and Kingdom timely filed a notice of appeal thereafter. 1 *814 “[W]hen the trial judge conducts a hearing on a motion to dismiss or transfer for improper venue, his findings, as a trier of fact, are tested by the any evidence rule.” McLendon v. Albany Warehouse Co., 203 Ga. App. 865, 866 (1) ( 418 SE2d 130 ) (1992) (citation omitted). | 4 | 5 |
Kil v. Legend Bros., LLCgreen2 sentences2024Co., 363 Ga. App. 126 , 127 ( 871 SE2d 8 ) (2022); accord Douglas Cnty., 340 Ga. App. at 801 . 21 See supra note 1 & accompanying text. 7 Turning to the WCA, as a general matter, this statute is the exclusive remedy for a worker or next of kin who sustains an “injury” arising out of and in the course of employment.22 Further, whether an injury “arises out of and in the course of employment is generally a mixed question of law and fact,”23 and these two prerequisites are “independent and distinct[.]”24 And while the WCA is intended to have broad application,25 there are exceptions to this sweep 2024Co., 363 Ga. App. 126 , 127 ( 871 SE2d 8 ) (2022); accord Douglas Cnty., 340 Ga. App. at 801 . 21 See supra note 1 & accompanying text. 7 Turning to the WCA, as a general matter, this statute is the exclusive remedy for a worker or next of kin who sustains an “injury” arising out of and in the course of employment.22 Further, whether an injury “arises out of and in the course of employment is generally a mixed question of law and fact,”23 and these two prerequisites are “independent and distinct[.]”24 And while the WCA is intended to have broad application,25 there are exceptions to this sweep | 1 | 1 |
Douglas County v. Hamilton State Bankgreen2 sentences2024A motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under OCGA § 9-11-12 (b) (1) can “allege either a facial challenge, in which the court accepts as true the allegations on the face of the complaint or a factual challenge, which requires 14 See supra note 12. 15 See supra note 12. 6 consideration of evidence beyond the face of the complaint.”16 Such a motion “may be heard and determined before trial[.]”17 And at such a hearing, factual issues “shall be determined by the trial court[,]” and they “will be reversed only where the evidence demands a contrary finding[.]”18 When the trial j 2024A motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under OCGA § 9-11-12 (b) (1) can “allege either a facial challenge, in which the court accepts as true the allegations on the face of the complaint or a factual challenge, which requires 14 See supra note 12. 15 See supra note 12. 6 consideration of evidence beyond the face of the complaint.”16 Such a motion “may be heard and determined before trial[.]”17 And at such a hearing, factual issues “shall be determined by the trial court[,]” and they “will be reversed only where the evidence demands a contrary finding[.]”18 When the trial j | 1 | 1 |
Lee v. Searsgreen2 sentences2024Co., 363 Ga. App. 126 , 127 ( 871 SE2d 8 ) (2022); accord Douglas Cnty., 340 Ga. App. at 801 . 21 See supra note 1 & accompanying text. 7 Turning to the WCA, as a general matter, this statute is the exclusive remedy for a worker or next of kin who sustains an “injury” arising out of and in the course of employment.22 Further, whether an injury “arises out of and in the course of employment is generally a mixed question of law and fact,”23 and these two prerequisites are “independent and distinct[.]”24 And while the WCA is intended to have broad application,25 there are exceptions to this sweep 2024Co., 363 Ga. App. 126 , 127 ( 871 SE2d 8 ) (2022); accord Douglas Cnty., 340 Ga. App. at 801 . 21 See supra note 1 & accompanying text. 7 Turning to the WCA, as a general matter, this statute is the exclusive remedy for a worker or next of kin who sustains an “injury” arising out of and in the course of employment.22 Further, whether an injury “arises out of and in the course of employment is generally a mixed question of law and fact,”23 and these two prerequisites are “independent and distinct[.]”24 And while the WCA is intended to have broad application,25 there are exceptions to this sweep | 1 | 1 |
Conrad v. Conradgreen2 sentences2024A motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under OCGA § 9-11-12 (b) (1) can “allege either a facial challenge, in which the court accepts as true the allegations on the face of the complaint or a factual challenge, which requires 14 See supra note 12. 15 See supra note 12. 6 consideration of evidence beyond the face of the complaint.”16 Such a motion “may be heard and determined before trial[.]”17 And at such a hearing, factual issues “shall be determined by the trial court[,]” and they “will be reversed only where the evidence demands a contrary finding[.]”18 When the trial j 2024A motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under OCGA § 9-11-12 (b) (1) can “allege either a facial challenge, in which the court accepts as true the allegations on the face of the complaint or a factual challenge, which requires 14 See supra note 12. 15 See supra note 12. 6 consideration of evidence beyond the face of the complaint.”16 Such a motion “may be heard and determined before trial[.]”17 And at such a hearing, factual issues “shall be determined by the trial court[,]” and they “will be reversed only where the evidence demands a contrary finding[.]”18 When the trial j | 1 | 1 |
Huddle House, Inc. v. Paragon Foods, Inc.green2 sentences2008However, as previously indicated, a preliminary hearing as to the defenses of lack of personal or subject matter jurisdiction and improper venue, “whether made in a pleading or by motion may be heard and determined before trial[,] and when the trial judge conducts a hearing on a motion to dismiss or transfer for improper venue, his findings, as a trier of fact, are tested by the any evidence rule.” (Footnote omitted.) Huddle House v. Paragon Foods, 263 Ga. App. 382, 383 ( 587 SE2d 845 ) (2003). 2008However, as previously indicated, a preliminary hearing as to the defenses of lack of personal or subject matter jurisdiction and improper venue, “whether made in a pleading or by motion may be heard and determined before trial[,] and when the trial judge conducts a hearing on a motion to dismiss or transfer for improper venue, his findings, as a trier of fact, are tested by the any evidence rule.” (Footnote omitted.) Huddle House v. Paragon Foods, 263 Ga. App. 382, 383 ( 587 SE2d 845 ) (2003). | 1 | 1 |
Montgomery v. USS Agri-Chemical Divisiongreen1 sentence2002Div., supra at 190 (1). | 1 | 1 |
Harper v. Stategreen2 sentences1978"Nor is it necessary to show that the defendant has been charged or convicted of a crime for the acts constituting the violation of probation. [Cits.]” Harper v. State, 130 Ga. App. 545, 546 ( 203 SE2d 866 ). 1978"Nor is it necessary to show that the defendant has been charged or convicted of a crime for the acts constituting the violation of probation. [Cits.]” Harper v. State, 130 Ga. App. 545, 546 ( 203 SE2d 866 ). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Atkinson v. State
green
2 sentences1978"When, after due notice, the trial judge conducts a hearing upon the question of revocation of a probationary sentence, he is not bound by the same degree of evidence as in the first instance, but has a wide discretion.” Atkinson v. State, 82 Ga. App. 414 ( 61 SE2d 212 ). 1978"When, after due notice, the trial judge conducts a hearing upon the question of revocation of a probationary sentence, he is not bound by the same degree of evidence as in the first instance, but has a wide discretion.” Atkinson v. State, 82 Ga. App. 414 ( 61 SE2d 212 ). | 4 | 1953–1978 |
Ogden Equipment Co. v. Talmadge Farms, Inc.
green
2 sentences1984Co. v. Talmadge Farms, 232 Ga. 614 ( 208 SE2d 459 ) it was held: "`Rule 56 contemplates a judgment on the merits, and cannot be properly utilized to raise matter in abatement.' . . . `Since a motion for summary judgment is designed to test the merits of the claim, the defenses enumerated in Rule 12 (b) (1) through Rule 12 (b) (5) and Rule 12 (b) (7) generally are not proper subjects for motions for summary judgment . . .'" Among the defenses enumerated in Rule 12 (OCGA § 9-11-12) is (b) (3): "Improper venue." When the trial judge conducts a hearing on the motion to dismiss for improper venue, 1984Co. v. Talmadge Farms, 232 Ga. 614 ( 208 SE2d 459 ) it was held: "`Rule 56 contemplates a judgment on the merits, and cannot be properly utilized to raise matter in abatement.' . . . `Since a motion for summary judgment is designed to test the merits of the claim, the defenses enumerated in Rule 12 (b) (1) through Rule 12 (b) (5) and Rule 12 (b) (7) generally are not proper subjects for motions for summary judgment . . .'" Among the defenses enumerated in Rule 12 (OCGA § 9-11-12) is (b) (3): "Improper venue." When the trial judge conducts a hearing on the motion to dismiss for improper venue, | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.