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 2000–2023 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 |
|---|---|---|
Lowe v. Jones Countygreen2 sentences2019Nichols , 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3), 650 S.E.2d 380 ; see Lowe v. Jones Cty. , 231 Ga. App. 372 , 373 (2), 499 S.E.2d 348 (1998) (holding that because deputies are employees of the sheriff and not the county, a vicarious liability claim against the county for a deputy's conduct is precluded); Brown , 221 Ga. App. at 201 (2), 470 S.E.2d 786 (holding that because deputy was the employee of the sheriff and not the county, sheriff and not the county would have been the proper party to have sued under a theory of respondeat superior). 2019Nichols , 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3), 650 S.E.2d 380 ; see Lowe v. Jones Cty. , 231 Ga. App. 372 , 373 (2), 499 S.E.2d 348 (1998) (holding that because deputies are employees of the sheriff and not the county, a vicarious liability claim against the county for a deputy's conduct is precluded); Brown , 221 Ga. App. at 201 (2), 470 S.E.2d 786 (holding that because deputy was the employee of the sheriff and not the county, sheriff and not the county would have been the proper party to have sued under a theory of respondeat superior). | 2 | 2 |
Battey v. Savannah Transit Authoritygreen1 sentence2023See, e.g., Screven County, 363 Ga. App. at 827; Battey, 123 Ga. App. at 685. 8 affirmative defense requires ABM to come forth with evidence. | 1 | 1 |
OLLER Et Al. v. ROCKDALE HOSPITAL, LLC Et Al.green2 sentences2019Here, the original and renewal complaints specifically identified Dr. Simonsen as an agent or employee of AWS, acting within the scope of her employment or agency, such that her acts and omissions are imputed to AWS, which is vicariously liable for the resulting injuries 6 (Punctuation omitted.) Walker v. Oglethorpe Power Corp., 341 Ga. App. 647, 669-670 (5) (d) ( 802 SE2d 643 ) (2017). 7 342 Ga. App. 591, 593-594 ( 804 SE2d 166 ) (2017), cert. denied Aug. 20, 2018. 8 See id. at 593 . 9 Id. at 593-594 . 11 and harm to Shannon, and the pleadings set forth factual allegations to support the plai 2019Here, the original and renewal complaints specifically identified Dr. Simonsen as an agent or employee of AWS, acting within the scope of her employment or agency, such that her acts and omissions are imputed to AWS, which is vicariously liable for the resulting injuries 6 (Punctuation omitted.) Walker v. Oglethorpe Power Corp., 341 Ga. App. 647, 669-670 (5) (d) ( 802 SE2d 643 ) (2017). 7 342 Ga. App. 591, 593-594 ( 804 SE2d 166 ) (2017), cert. denied Aug. 20, 2018. 8 See id. at 593 . 9 Id. at 593-594 . 11 and harm to Shannon, and the pleadings set forth factual allegations to support the plai | 1 | 1 |
Tenet HealthSystem GB, Inc. v. Thomasgreen2 sentences2019Tenet HealthSystem GB, Inc. v. Thomas, 304 Ga. 86, 89 ( 816 SE2d 627 ) (2018). 10 construed forgivingly and reasonably to achieve substantial justice consistent with the statutory requirements of the Act.”6 In Oller v. Rockdale Hosp., LLC,7 this Court held that the plaintiffs properly stated a vicarious liability claim against a defendant medical practice, even though none of the negligent physicians were identified specifically.8 This Court explained that because the timely-filed renewal complaint alleged that the practice was vicariously liable for the negligence of the physicians that treat 2019Tenet HealthSystem GB, Inc. v. Thomas, 304 Ga. 86, 89 ( 816 SE2d 627 ) (2018). 10 construed forgivingly and reasonably to achieve substantial justice consistent with the statutory requirements of the Act.”6 In Oller v. Rockdale Hosp., LLC,7 this Court held that the plaintiffs properly stated a vicarious liability claim against a defendant medical practice, even though none of the negligent physicians were identified specifically.8 This Court explained that because the timely-filed renewal complaint alleged that the practice was vicariously liable for the negligence of the physicians that treat | 1 | 1 |
Croy v. Whitfield Countygreen2 sentences2019Croy , 301 Ga. at 381 (2), 801 S.E.2d 892 . 2019But the dissent’s argument 26 See supra notes 19-21. 27 Nichols, 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3) (punctuation omitted); accord Brown v. Jackson, 221 Ga. App. 200, 201 (2) ( 470 SE2d 786 ) (1996); Wayne Cty. v. Herrin, 210 Ga. App. 747, 751 (3) ( 437 SE2d 793 ) (1993). 28 Nichols, 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3); see Lowe v. Jones Cty., 231 Ga. App. 372, 373 (2) ( 499 SE2d 348 ) (1998) (holding that because deputies are employees of the sheriff and not the county, a vicarious liability claim against the county for a deputy’s conduct is precluded); Brown, 221 Ga. App. at 201 (2) (holding that because deputy was | 1 | 1 |
Walker v. Oglethorpe Power Corp.green2 sentences2019Here, the original and renewal complaints specifically identified Dr. Simonsen as an agent or employee of AWS, acting within the scope of her employment or agency, such that her acts and omissions are imputed to AWS, which is vicariously liable for the resulting injuries 6 (Punctuation omitted.) Walker v. Oglethorpe Power Corp., 341 Ga. App. 647, 669-670 (5) (d) ( 802 SE2d 643 ) (2017). 7 342 Ga. App. 591, 593-594 ( 804 SE2d 166 ) (2017), cert. denied Aug. 20, 2018. 8 See id. at 593 . 9 Id. at 593-594 . 11 and harm to Shannon, and the pleadings set forth factual allegations to support the plai 2019Here, the original and renewal complaints specifically identified Dr. Simonsen as an agent or employee of AWS, acting within the scope of her employment or agency, such that her acts and omissions are imputed to AWS, which is vicariously liable for the resulting injuries 6 (Punctuation omitted.) Walker v. Oglethorpe Power Corp., 341 Ga. App. 647, 669-670 (5) (d) ( 802 SE2d 643 ) (2017). 7 342 Ga. App. 591, 593-594 ( 804 SE2d 166 ) (2017), cert. denied Aug. 20, 2018. 8 See id. at 593 . 9 Id. at 593-594 . 11 and harm to Shannon, and the pleadings set forth factual allegations to support the plai | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. Jacksongreen2 sentences2019Nichols , 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3), 650 S.E.2d 380 ; see Lowe v. Jones Cty. , 231 Ga. App. 372 , 373 (2), 499 S.E.2d 348 (1998) (holding that because deputies are employees of the sheriff and not the county, a vicarious liability claim against the county for a deputy's conduct is precluded); Brown , 221 Ga. App. at 201 (2), 470 S.E.2d 786 (holding that because deputy was the employee of the sheriff and not the county, sheriff and not the county would have been the proper party to have sued under a theory of respondeat superior). 2019Nichols , 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3), 650 S.E.2d 380 ; see Lowe v. Jones Cty. , 231 Ga. App. 372 , 373 (2), 499 S.E.2d 348 (1998) (holding that because deputies are employees of the sheriff and not the county, a vicarious liability claim against the county for a deputy's conduct is precluded); Brown , 221 Ga. App. at 201 (2), 470 S.E.2d 786 (holding that because deputy was the employee of the sheriff and not the county, sheriff and not the county would have been the proper party to have sued under a theory of respondeat superior). | 1 | 1 |
Wayne County v. Herringreen2 sentences2019But the dissent’s argument 26 See supra notes 19-21. 27 Nichols, 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3) (punctuation omitted); accord Brown v. Jackson, 221 Ga. App. 200, 201 (2) ( 470 SE2d 786 ) (1996); Wayne Cty. v. Herrin, 210 Ga. App. 747, 751 (3) ( 437 SE2d 793 ) (1993). 28 Nichols, 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3); see Lowe v. Jones Cty., 231 Ga. App. 372, 373 (2) ( 499 SE2d 348 ) (1998) (holding that because deputies are employees of the sheriff and not the county, a vicarious liability claim against the county for a deputy’s conduct is precluded); Brown, 221 Ga. App. at 201 (2) (holding that because deputy was 2019But the dissent’s argument 26 See supra notes 19-21. 27 Nichols, 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3) (punctuation omitted); accord Brown v. Jackson, 221 Ga. App. 200, 201 (2) ( 470 SE2d 786 ) (1996); Wayne Cty. v. Herrin, 210 Ga. App. 747, 751 (3) ( 437 SE2d 793 ) (1993). 28 Nichols, 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3); see Lowe v. Jones Cty., 231 Ga. App. 372, 373 (2) ( 499 SE2d 348 ) (1998) (holding that because deputies are employees of the sheriff and not the county, a vicarious liability claim against the county for a deputy’s conduct is precluded); Brown, 221 Ga. App. at 201 (2) (holding that because deputy was | 1 | 1 |
Nichols v. Prathergreen2 sentences2019Nichols , 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3), 650 S.E.2d 380 ; see Lowe v. Jones Cty. , 231 Ga. App. 372 , 373 (2), 499 S.E.2d 348 (1998) (holding that because deputies are employees of the sheriff and not the county, a vicarious liability claim against the county for a deputy's conduct is precluded); Brown , 221 Ga. App. at 201 (2), 470 S.E.2d 786 (holding that because deputy was the employee of the sheriff and not the county, sheriff and not the county would have been the proper party to have sued under a theory of respondeat superior). 2019Nichols , 286 Ga. App. at 895 (3), 650 S.E.2d 380 ; see Lowe v. Jones Cty. , 231 Ga. App. 372 , 373 (2), 499 S.E.2d 348 (1998) (holding that because deputies are employees of the sheriff and not the county, a vicarious liability claim against the county for a deputy's conduct is precluded); Brown , 221 Ga. App. at 201 (2), 470 S.E.2d 786 (holding that because deputy was the employee of the sheriff and not the county, sheriff and not the county would have been the proper party to have sued under a theory of respondeat superior). | 1 | 1 |
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twomblygreen2 sentences2017Indeed, the forgiving notice pleading standard of OCGA § 9-11-8 (a) (2) (A)—Georgia’s statutory codification of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 (a) (2)—is “the starting point of a simplified pleading system, which was adopted to focus litigation on the merits of a claim.”6 Thus, while 24 On attempts to characterize the vicarious liability claim involving Dr. Syed as a separate time-barred claim, it is simply another theory 6 Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U. S. 506, 514 (II) (122 Sct 992, 152 LE2d 1) (2002) (Thomas, J.); see also Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U. S. 544, 575 (I) ( 12 2017Indeed, the forgiving notice pleading standard of OCGA § 9-11-8 (a) (2) (A)—Georgia’s statutory codification of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 (a) (2)—is “the starting point of a simplified pleading system, which was adopted to focus litigation on the merits of a claim.”6 Thus, while 24 On attempts to characterize the vicarious liability claim involving Dr. Syed as a separate time-barred claim, it is simply another theory 6 Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U. S. 506, 514 (II) (122 Sct 992, 152 LE2d 1) (2002) (Thomas, J.); see also Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U. S. 544, 575 (I) ( 12 | 1 | 1 |
Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.green1 sentence2017Indeed, the forgiving notice pleading standard of OCGA § 9-11-8 (a) (2) (A)—Georgia’s statutory codification of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 (a) (2)—is “the starting point of a simplified pleading system, which was adopted to focus litigation on the merits of a claim.”6 Thus, while 24 On attempts to characterize the vicarious liability claim involving Dr. Syed as a separate time-barred claim, it is simply another theory 6 Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U. S. 506, 514 (II) (122 Sct 992, 152 LE2d 1) (2002) (Thomas, J.); see also Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U. S. 544, 575 (I) ( 12 | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. Dorseygreen1 sentence2010See also Bradshaw v. Glass, 252 Ga. 429, 431 ( 314 SE2d 233 ) (1984) (“As a general matter, a workers’ compensation statutory scheme covers employers and employees who occupy vis-á-vis one another a common-law master-servant relationship.”). 24 See Brown, 276 Ga. App. at 856 (1). | 1 | 1 |
Bradshaw v. Glassgreen2 sentences2010See also Bradshaw v. Glass, 252 Ga. 429, 431 ( 314 SE2d 233 ) (1984) (“As a general matter, a workers’ compensation statutory scheme covers employers and employees who occupy vis-á-vis one another a common-law master-servant relationship.”). 24 See Brown, 276 Ga. App. at 856 (1). 2010See also Bradshaw v. Glass, 252 Ga. 429, 431 ( 314 SE2d 233 ) (1984) (“As a general matter, a workers’ compensation statutory scheme covers employers and employees who occupy vis-á-vis one another a common-law master-servant relationship.”). 24 See Brown, 276 Ga. App. at 856 (1). | 1 | 1 |
Farmer v. Ryder Truck Lines, Inc.green2 sentences2010See also Lowe v. Jones County, 231 Ga. App. 372, 373 (2) ( 499 SE2d 348 ) (1998) (addressing a vicarious liability claim). 23 See generally Burt v. Underwood, 258 Ga. 207 ( 367 SE2d 230 ) (1988) (recognizing tort principles when determining who qualifies as a co-employee under the Act); Farmer v. Ryder Truck Lines, 245 Ga. 734, 737, n. 2 ( 266 SE2d 922 ) (1980) (recognizing the relationship of tort law to the determination of who is an employee under the Act). 2010See also Lowe v. Jones County, 231 Ga. App. 372, 373 (2) ( 499 SE2d 348 ) (1998) (addressing a vicarious liability claim). 23 See generally Burt v. Underwood, 258 Ga. 207 ( 367 SE2d 230 ) (1988) (recognizing tort principles when determining who qualifies as a co-employee under the Act); Farmer v. Ryder Truck Lines, 245 Ga. 734, 737, n. 2 ( 266 SE2d 922 ) (1980) (recognizing the relationship of tort law to the determination of who is an employee under the Act). | 1 | 1 |
Burt v. Underwoodgreen2 sentences2010See also Lowe v. Jones County, 231 Ga. App. 372, 373 (2) ( 499 SE2d 348 ) (1998) (addressing a vicarious liability claim). 23 See generally Burt v. Underwood, 258 Ga. 207 ( 367 SE2d 230 ) (1988) (recognizing tort principles when determining who qualifies as a co-employee under the Act); Farmer v. Ryder Truck Lines, 245 Ga. 734, 737, n. 2 ( 266 SE2d 922 ) (1980) (recognizing the relationship of tort law to the determination of who is an employee under the Act). 2010See also Lowe v. Jones County, 231 Ga. App. 372, 373 (2) ( 499 SE2d 348 ) (1998) (addressing a vicarious liability claim). 23 See generally Burt v. Underwood, 258 Ga. 207 ( 367 SE2d 230 ) (1988) (recognizing tort principles when determining who qualifies as a co-employee under the Act); Farmer v. Ryder Truck Lines, 245 Ga. 734, 737, n. 2 ( 266 SE2d 922 ) (1980) (recognizing the relationship of tort law to the determination of who is an employee under the Act). | 1 | 1 |
ITT Rayonier, Inc. v. McLaneygreen2 sentences2008ITT Rayonier v. McLaney, 204 Ga. App. 762, 764 (1) ( 420 SE2d 610 ) (1992). 2008ITT Rayonier v. McLaney, 204 Ga. App. 762, 764 (1) ( 420 SE2d 610 ) (1992). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Harvey v. Taylor
green
2 sentences2019Mercier and Brown, JJ., concur. 1 Carr also sued the parents for negligent entrustment, but she later voluntarily dismissed that claim. 2 "An adult child of the [car] owner may be a 'family member' within the meaning of the family purpose doctrine if the child lives in the parent's household and uses the car for a purpose for which it was provided by the parent." Harvey v. Taylor , 193 Ga. App. 172 , 174, 387 S.E.2d 403 (1989). 3 Although Carr's complaint did not specifically include a vicarious liability claim against the parents predicated on the doctrine of respondeat superior, Carr argued 2019Mercier and Brown, JJ., concur. 1 Carr also sued the parents for negligent entrustment, but she later voluntarily dismissed that claim. 2 "An adult child of the [car] owner may be a 'family member' within the meaning of the family purpose doctrine if the child lives in the parent's household and uses the car for a purpose for which it was provided by the parent." Harvey v. Taylor , 193 Ga. App. 172 , 174, 387 S.E.2d 403 (1989). 3 Although Carr's complaint did not specifically include a vicarious liability claim against the parents predicated on the doctrine of respondeat superior, Carr argued | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Abrams v. State
green
1 sentence2018Cf. Weber v. Freeman , 3 So.3d 825 , 834 (Ala. 2008) (under Alabama's very similar provision, no relation back where the plaintiff "was seeking to add new facts and a new claim that the surgery center was vicariously liable for a different doctor on a different day from those actions that formed the basis of the claims asserted in the [earlier] complaint[s]"). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Hicks v. McGee
green
2 sentences2018"Without an express ruling on the [issue of Antinozzi's capacity and the vicarious liability standard dictated by that capacity], the law of the case rule as articulated in OCGA § 9-11-60 (h) is inapplicable here." Hicks v. McGee , 289 Ga. 573 , 578 (2), 713 S.E.2d 841 (2011) (citations omitted). (b) The undisputed fact that Antinozzi was working full-time for private employer Agnes Scott permits a finding that he was acting solely in the capacity of Agnes Scott's private servant, rather than as a public officer. 2018"Without an express ruling on the [issue of Antinozzi's capacity and the vicarious liability standard dictated by that capacity], the law of the case rule as articulated in OCGA § 9-11-60 (h) is inapplicable here." Hicks v. McGee , 289 Ga. 573 , 578 (2), 713 S.E.2d 841 (2011) (citations omitted). (b) The undisputed fact that Antinozzi was working full-time for private employer Agnes Scott permits a finding that he was acting solely in the capacity of Agnes Scott's private servant, rather than as a public officer. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Thomas v. Medical Center of Central Georgia
green
2 sentences2016In Thomas, the plaintiff initially filed a complaint and supporting affidavit asserting a vicarious liability claim against the medical center defendant based on the alleged professional negligence of a doctor.2 After the expiration of the statute of limitations, the plaintiff attempted to add claims of vicarious liability based on the professional negligence of various nurses.3 This Court concluded that such a new claim of vicarious liability could not be added after the statute of limitation had expired because the plaintiff (1) failed to file any such claims previously, (2) failed to file a 2016In Thomas, the plaintiff initially filed a complaint and supporting affidavit asserting a vicarious liability claim against the medical center defendant based on the alleged professional negligence of a doctor.2 After the expiration of the statute of limitations, the plaintiff attempted to add claims of vicarious liability based on the professional negligence of various nurses.3 This Court concluded that such a new claim of vicarious liability could not be added after the statute of limitation had expired because the plaintiff (1) failed to file any such claims previously, (2) failed to file a | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Miller v. City Views at Rosa Burney Park GP, LLC
green
1 sentence2014Id. at 595 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Clark v. Security Life Insurance Co. of America
green
1 sentence2000Security II, supra at 168(2), 509 S.E.2d 602 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.