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 2 courts 1911–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
Otis v. Stategreen2 sentences2017Compare Otis v. State, 298 Ga. 544, 545 ( 782 SE2d 654 ) (2016) (retrial was barred after a mistrial that was improperly based on the defendant’s supposed violation of a notice requirement that was inapplicable under controlling precedent). 2017Compare Otis v. State, 298 Ga. 544, 545 ( 782 SE2d 654 ) (2016) (retrial was barred after a mistrial that was improperly based on the defendant’s supposed violation of a notice requirement that was inapplicable under controlling precedent). | 2 | 2 |
Turner v. Security Plumbing Co.green2 sentences1941R. 126 ; Turner v. Security Plumbing Co., 165 Ga. 479, 483, 484 , 141 S. E. 291 ; Burrus Motor Co., v. Patterson-Pope Motor Co., 50 Ga. App. 801, 810 , 179 S. E. 171 ), those cases and others upon which the supposed rule .rests, on examination and analysis, show that the immoral or oppressive methods constitute-actionable fraud or deceit, or illegal agreements in general restraint of trade (Code of 1933, § 20-504), or agreements in contravention of the common law to stifle competition, or constituted a violation of some recognized rule of public policy, with the result that in all cases the me 1941R. 126 ; Turner v. Security Plumbing Co., 165 Ga. 479, 483, 484 , 141 S. E. 291 ; Burrus Motor Co., v. Patterson-Pope Motor Co., 50 Ga. App. 801, 810 , 179 S. E. 171 ), those cases and others upon which the supposed rule .rests, on examination and analysis, show that the immoral or oppressive methods constitute-actionable fraud or deceit, or illegal agreements in general restraint of trade (Code of 1933, § 20-504), or agreements in contravention of the common law to stifle competition, or constituted a violation of some recognized rule of public policy, with the result that in all cases the me | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Burrus Motor Co. v. Patterson-Pope Motor Co.
green
2 sentences1941R. 126 ; Turner v. Security Plumbing Co., 165 Ga. 479, 483, 484 , 141 S. E. 291 ; Burrus Motor Co., v. Patterson-Pope Motor Co., 50 Ga. App. 801, 810 , 179 S. E. 171 ), those cases and others upon which the supposed rule .rests, on examination and analysis, show that the immoral or oppressive methods constitute-actionable fraud or deceit, or illegal agreements in general restraint of trade (Code of 1933, § 20-504), or agreements in contravention of the common law to stifle competition, or constituted a violation of some recognized rule of public policy, with the result that in all cases the me 1941R. 126 ; Turner v. Security Plumbing Co., 165 Ga. 479, 483, 484 , 141 S. E. 291 ; Burrus Motor Co., v. Patterson-Pope Motor Co., 50 Ga. App. 801, 810 , 179 S. E. 171 ), those cases and others upon which the supposed rule .rests, on examination and analysis, show that the immoral or oppressive methods constitute-actionable fraud or deceit, or illegal agreements in general restraint of trade (Code of 1933, § 20-504), or agreements in contravention of the common law to stifle competition, or constituted a violation of some recognized rule of public policy, with the result that in all cases the me | 2 | 1935–1941 |
Frigidice Co. v. Southeastern Fair Ass'n
green
2 sentences1941R. 126 ; Turner v. Security Plumbing Co., 165 Ga. 479, 483, 484 , 141 S. E. 291 ; Burrus Motor Co., v. Patterson-Pope Motor Co., 50 Ga. App. 801, 810 , 179 S. E. 171 ), those cases and others upon which the supposed rule .rests, on examination and analysis, show that the immoral or oppressive methods constitute-actionable fraud or deceit, or illegal agreements in general restraint of trade (Code of 1933, § 20-504), or agreements in contravention of the common law to stifle competition, or constituted a violation of some recognized rule of public policy, with the result that in all cases the me 1941R. 126 ; Turner v. Security Plumbing Co., 165 Ga. 479, 483, 484 , 141 S. E. 291 ; Burrus Motor Co., v. Patterson-Pope Motor Co., 50 Ga. App. 801, 810 , 179 S. E. 171 ), those cases and others upon which the supposed rule .rests, on examination and analysis, show that the immoral or oppressive methods constitute-actionable fraud or deceit, or illegal agreements in general restraint of trade (Code of 1933, § 20-504), or agreements in contravention of the common law to stifle competition, or constituted a violation of some recognized rule of public policy, with the result that in all cases the me | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Nobles v. State
green
1 sentence1911Nobles v. State, 127 Ga. 213 (4), ( 56 S. E. 125 ). 4, 5. | 1 | 1911–1911 |
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.