Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Stoker v. BELLEMEADE, LLC
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided February 16, 2005No. A04A2108, A04A2109Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAdams, Judge
In Case No. A04A2108,1 concur with the result in Division 1 of the majority opinion but disagree with the reasoning, and I respectfully dissent to Divisions 2 and 3.1 fully concur in Case No. A04A2109.
1. In Count 3 of their restated complaint, Stoker and his company claim that Casa Cajeo, Inc., the primary owner of the real estate intended for commercial development, was unjustly enriched when Westbury Properties refused to allow Stoker to participate in the development of the commercial property. One intended result of developing the residential property was to enhance the value of the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Engram v. EngramSupreme Court of Georgia · 1995
- Zampatti v. Tradebank International Franchising Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1998
- Southeast Consultants, Inc. v. McCrary Engineering Corp.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1980
- R. T. Patterson Funeral Home, Inc. v. HeadCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1994
- Tidwell v. GarrickSupreme Court of Georgia · 1919
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.