Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Garcia v. Shaw Industries, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 29, 2013No. A12A1667Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRay, Judge

Because the majority opinion incorrectly finds that a rational jury could not find Shaw’s conduct either outrageous or extreme, I respectfully dissent to Division 1.1 concur fully in Division 2.

Garcia has provided evidence amply evincing a fact question for the jury on the issue of whether Shaw’s conduct in filing the fraud complaint with the Board, and in taking steps to engineer her arrest, was extreme and outrageous. First, Shaw filed the Board complaint alleging fraud when it knew or should have known that a fraud claim could not survive because an essential element necessary to support…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Gordon v. FrostCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1989
  2. Turnage v. KasperCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2010
  3. Fleming v. U-Haul Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2000
  4. Kent v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1999
  5. Earth First Grading v. GutierrezCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2004

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API