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.
5 Georgia opinions name it 1 courts 1976–2008 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 |
|---|---|---|
Zeeman v. Blackgreen2 sentences2005Crown Ford v. Crawford, 221 Ga. App. 881, 883 (1) ( 473 SE2d 554 ) (1996); Zeeman v. Black, supra, 156 Ga. App. at 86 . 1991Zeeman v. Black, 156 Ga. App. 82, 84-86 ( 273 SE2d 910 ) (1980). | 1 | 2 |
Cabaniss v. Hipsleygreen2 sentences2008The tort of invasion of privacy includes claims based on “intrusion upon the plaintiffs seclusion or solitude, or into his private affairs.” Cabaniss v. Hipsley, 114 Ga. App. 367, 370 ( 151 SE2d 496 ) (1966). *584 The “unreasonable intrusion” aspect of the invasion of privacy involves a prying or intrusion, which would be offensive or objectionable to a reasonable person, into a person’s private concerns. 2008The tort of invasion of privacy includes claims based on “intrusion upon the plaintiffs seclusion or solitude, or into his private affairs.” Cabaniss v. Hipsley, 114 Ga. App. 367, 370 ( 151 SE2d 496 ) (1966). *584 The “unreasonable intrusion” aspect of the invasion of privacy involves a prying or intrusion, which would be offensive or objectionable to a reasonable person, into a person’s private concerns. | 1 | 1 |
Crown Ford, Inc. v. Crawfordgreen2 sentences2005Crown Ford v. Crawford, 221 Ga. App. 881, 883 (1) ( 473 SE2d 554 ) (1996); Zeeman v. Black, supra, 156 Ga. App. at 86 . 2005Crown Ford v. Crawford, 221 Ga. App. 881, 883 (1) ( 473 SE2d 554 ) (1996); Zeeman v. Black, supra, 156 Ga. App. at 86 . | 1 | 1 |
Borden v. Pope Jeep-Eagle, Inc.green2 sentences1994In other words, unless it can be said that th< defendant’s actions had or has potential harm for the consumer pub lie the act or practice cannot be said to have impact on the consume-] marketplace and any act or practice which is outside that context, nc matter how unfair or deceptive, is not directly regulated by th< FBPA.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Borden v. Pope Jeep Eagle, 200 Ga. App. 176, 178 (1) ( 407 SE2d 128 ). 1994In other words, unless it can be said that th< defendant’s actions had or has potential harm for the consumer pub lie the act or practice cannot be said to have impact on the consume-] marketplace and any act or practice which is outside that context, nc matter how unfair or deceptive, is not directly regulated by th< FBPA.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Borden v. Pope Jeep Eagle, 200 Ga. App. 176, 178 (1) ( 407 SE2d 128 ). | 1 | 1 |
Montgomery v. Stategreen2 sentences1976See Montgomery v. State, 128 Ga. App. 116, 117 (3) ( 195 SE2d 784 ). 4. 1976See Montgomery v. State, 128 Ga. App. 116, 117 (3) ( 195 SE2d 784 ). 4. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.