Legal Opinion
HARVEY v. MERCHAN
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided June 21, 2021No. S21A0143PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
311 Ga. 811
FINAL COPY S21A0143. HARVEY et al. v. MERCHAN. PETERSON, Justice. For a brief time period, OCGA § 9-3-33.1 allowed time-barred civil claims for childhood sexual abuse to be revived. During that time period, Joy Caroline Harvey Merchan sued her parents, Walter Jackson Harvey, Jr., and Carole Allyn Hill Harvey, under the revival provision of the statute for damages resulting from alleged childhood sexual abuse that occurred decades prior to the filing of the action, principally in Quebec, Canada. The Harveys filed a motion to dismiss and a motion for summary judgment, arguing that…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Heller v. Doe Ex Rel. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- California Department of Corrections v. MoralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Harisiades v. ShaughnessySupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Chase Securities Corp. v. DonaldsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1986
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- ROCKDALE COUNTY. v. U. S. ENTERPRISES, INC.; And Vice VersaSupreme Court of Georgia · 2021
- SPANN v. DAVISSupreme Court of Georgia · 2021
- TAYLOR, EXR. v. THE DEVEREUX FOUNDATION, INC. (And Vice Versa)Supreme Court of Georgia · 2023
- EFFICIENCY LODGE, INC. v. NEASONSupreme Court of Georgia · 2023
- Burns v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2022
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.