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.
6 Georgia opinions name it 1 courts 1982–2019 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Martin v. Newmangreen2 sentences1985Minor III, for appellees. “ ‘The party opposing a motion for summary judgment has until the day prior to the hearing to serve opposing affidavits, unless the trial court in its discretion permits them to be served at a later date. [OCGA §§ 9-11-6 (d) and 9-11-56 (c)]. ... [A] response to a motion for summary judgment is timely filed if filed on the date of the hearing, . . .’ [Cit.]” Martin v. Newman, 162 Ga. App. 725, 726 (2) ( 293 SE2d 18 ) (1982). 1985Minor III, for appellees. “ ‘The party opposing a motion for summary judgment has until the day prior to the hearing to serve opposing affidavits, unless the trial court in its discretion permits them to be served at a later date. [OCGA §§ 9-11-6 (d) and 9-11-56 (c)]. ... [A] response to a motion for summary judgment is timely filed if filed on the date of the hearing, . . .’ [Cit.]” Martin v. Newman, 162 Ga. App. 725, 726 (2) ( 293 SE2d 18 ) (1982). | 1 | 2 |
SIMMONS v. PRINCE Et Al.green2 sentences2019Compare Simmons v. Prince , 343 Ga. App. 175 , 177 (1), 806 S.E.2d 627 (2017) (plaintiff admitted to knowing of the gaps between the railing balusters); LeCroy v. Bragg , 319 Ga. App. 884 , 886 (1), 739 S.E.2d 1 (2013) (plaintiff testified that she saw the potholes when she drove into the parking lot). 2 In light of our conclusion, we do not address Simon's argument that the trial court erred in considering materials filed by the appellees the day prior to the hearing on the summary judgment motion. 2019Compare Simmons v. Prince , 343 Ga. App. 175 , 177 (1), 806 S.E.2d 627 (2017) (plaintiff admitted to knowing of the gaps between the railing balusters); LeCroy v. Bragg , 319 Ga. App. 884 , 886 (1), 739 S.E.2d 1 (2013) (plaintiff testified that she saw the potholes when she drove into the parking lot). 2 In light of our conclusion, we do not address Simon's argument that the trial court erred in considering materials filed by the appellees the day prior to the hearing on the summary judgment motion. | 1 | 1 |
Liberty Forest Products, Inc. v. Interstate Paper Corp.green2 sentences1985See Liberty Forest Prods. v. Interstate Paper Corp., 138 Ga. App. 153 ( 225 SE2d 731 ) (1976). 1985See Liberty Forest Prods. v. Interstate Paper Corp., 138 Ga. App. 153 ( 225 SE2d 731 ) (1976). | 1 | 1 |
Robert Chuckrow Construction Co. v. Goughgreen2 sentences1982See Robert Chuckrow Const. Co. v. Gough, 117 Ga. App. 140 (1) ( 159 SE2d 469 ) (1968). 1982See Robert Chuckrow Const. Co. v. Gough, 117 Ga. App. 140 (1) ( 159 SE2d 469 ) (1968). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
LeCroy v. Bragg
green
2 sentences2019Compare Simmons v. Prince , 343 Ga. App. 175 , 177 (1), 806 S.E.2d 627 (2017) (plaintiff admitted to knowing of the gaps between the railing balusters); LeCroy v. Bragg , 319 Ga. App. 884 , 886 (1), 739 S.E.2d 1 (2013) (plaintiff testified that she saw the potholes when she drove into the parking lot). 2 In light of our conclusion, we do not address Simon's argument that the trial court erred in considering materials filed by the appellees the day prior to the hearing on the summary judgment motion. 2019Compare Simmons v. Prince , 343 Ga. App. 175 , 177 (1), 806 S.E.2d 627 (2017) (plaintiff admitted to knowing of the gaps between the railing balusters); LeCroy v. Bragg , 319 Ga. App. 884 , 886 (1), 739 S.E.2d 1 (2013) (plaintiff testified that she saw the potholes when she drove into the parking lot). 2 In light of our conclusion, we do not address Simon's argument that the trial court erred in considering materials filed by the appellees the day prior to the hearing on the summary judgment motion. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Gross v. PYROFAX GAS CORPORATION
green
2 sentences1985OCGA § 9-11-56 (c) provides, in pertinent part, that “[t]he adverse party prior to the day of hearing may serve opposing affidavits.” In accordance with this code section, it has been held that “[t]he party opposing a motion for summary judgment has until the day prior to the hearing to serve opposing affidavits, unless the trial court in its discretion permits them to be served at a later date [OCGA § 9-11-6 (d)].” Gross v. Pyrofax Gas Corp., 151 Ga. App. 130 ( 259 SE2d 137 ) (1979). 1985OCGA § 9-11-56 (c) provides, in pertinent part, that “[t]he adverse party prior to the day of hearing may serve opposing affidavits.” In accordance with this code section, it has been held that “[t]he party opposing a motion for summary judgment has until the day prior to the hearing to serve opposing affidavits, unless the trial court in its discretion permits them to be served at a later date [OCGA § 9-11-6 (d)].” Gross v. Pyrofax Gas Corp., 151 Ga. App. 130 ( 259 SE2d 137 ) (1979). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
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.