injured party claim in Georgia

2009Thus, "the rule in this state [is] that defects in following the notice provisions of the tax sale statute may give an injured party a claim for damages, but will not render the tax sale or the deed therefrom void," GE Capital Mortgage Svcs., Inc. v. Clack, 271 Ga. 82, 83 , 515 S.E.2d 619 (1999) (citing Sizemore v. Brown, 179 Ga.App. 594 , 347 S.E.2d 345 (1986)), and we recently reiterated that "any failure to provide the appropriate tax notice would not serve as a basis for nullifying the ultimate tax sale," Davis v. Harpagon Co., 281 Ga. 250, 252 , 637 S.E.2d 1 (2006).

2009Thus, "the rule in this state [is] that defects in following the notice provisions of the tax sale statute may give an injured party a claim for damages, but will not render the tax sale or the deed therefrom void," GE Capital Mortgage Svcs., Inc. v. Clack, 271 Ga. 82, 83 , 515 S.E.2d 619 (1999) (citing Sizemore v. Brown, 179 Ga.App. 594 , 347 S.E.2d 345 (1986)), and we recently reiterated that "any failure to provide the appropriate tax notice would not serve as a basis for nullifying the ultimate tax sale," Davis v. Harpagon Co., 281 Ga. 250, 252 , 637 S.E.2d 1 (2006).

2021See Wilson, 339 Ga. App. at 834 (2) (c) (concluding that even if list of reasons for layoffs of professors contained in handbook was not an exhaustive list, the canons of ejusdem generis and noscitur a sociis still placed limits on the reasons that the university was authorized to give for laying off professors). 50 “Generally, the fact that an indemnitee has settled or compromised the underlying tort action brought by the injured party does not bar the indemnitee from pursuing a claim for indemnification or contribution from a third-party indemnitor.” U.S. Lawns v. Cutting Edge Landscaping, 3

2021See Wilson, 339 Ga. App. at 834 (2) (c) (concluding that even if list of reasons for layoffs of professors contained in handbook was not an exhaustive list, the canons of ejusdem generis and noscitur a sociis still placed limits on the reasons that the university was authorized to give for laying off professors). 50 “Generally, the fact that an indemnitee has settled or compromised the underlying tort action brought by the injured party does not bar the indemnitee from pursuing a claim for indemnification or contribution from a third-party indemnitor.” U.S. Lawns v. Cutting Edge Landscaping, 3

2021See Wilson, 339 Ga. App. at 834 (2) (c) (concluding that even if list of reasons for layoffs of professors contained in handbook was not an exhaustive list, the canons of ejusdem generis and noscitur a sociis still placed limits on the reasons that the university was authorized to give for laying off professors). 50 “Generally, the fact that an indemnitee has settled or compromised the underlying tort action brought by the injured party does not bar the indemnitee from pursuing a claim for indemnification or contribution from a third-party indemnitor.” U.S. Lawns v. Cutting Edge Landscaping, 3

2009Thus, "the rule in this state [is] that defects in following the notice provisions of the tax sale statute may give an injured party a claim for damages, but will not render the tax sale or the deed therefrom void," GE Capital Mortgage Svcs., Inc. v. Clack, 271 Ga. 82, 83 , 515 S.E.2d 619 (1999) (citing Sizemore v. Brown, 179 Ga.App. 594 , 347 S.E.2d 345 (1986)), and we recently reiterated that "any failure to provide the appropriate tax notice would not serve as a basis for nullifying the ultimate tax sale," Davis v. Harpagon Co., 281 Ga. 250, 252 , 637 S.E.2d 1 (2006).

2009Thus, "the rule in this state [is] that defects in following the notice provisions of the tax sale statute may give an injured party a claim for damages, but will not render the tax sale or the deed therefrom void," GE Capital Mortgage Svcs., Inc. v. Clack, 271 Ga. 82, 83 , 515 S.E.2d 619 (1999) (citing Sizemore v. Brown, 179 Ga.App. 594 , 347 S.E.2d 345 (1986)), and we recently reiterated that "any failure to provide the appropriate tax notice would not serve as a basis for nullifying the ultimate tax sale," Davis v. Harpagon Co., 281 Ga. 250, 252 , 637 S.E.2d 1 (2006).

1980In Dougherty County v. Hornsby, 213 Ga. 114, 117 (1) ( 97 SE2d 300 ), in the construction of certain curbing “to and in front of petitioner’s property which impaired the means of ingress and egress thereto, thereby depreciating its market value and damaging his property for public purposes without just and adequate compensation being first paid,” has been held to entitle the injured party to a claim for damages.

1980In Dougherty County v. Hornsby, 213 Ga. 114, 117 (1) ( 97 SE2d 300 ), in the construction of certain curbing “to and in front of petitioner’s property which impaired the means of ingress and egress thereto, thereby depreciating its market value and damaging his property for public purposes without just and adequate compensation being first paid,” has been held to entitle the injured party to a claim for damages.