Legal Opinion

Durham v. Mooney

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided October 16, 1998No. A98A1292PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Smith, Judge.

William and Cora Durham brought suit against Charles Mooney to recover damages for personal injury, punitive damages, and loss of consortium incurred when Mooney’s dog bit William Durham. The trial court granted Mooney’s motion for summary judgment, and this appeal ensued. We find that because Mooney successfully negated at least one essential element of the Durhams’ case, the trial court properly entered summary judgment in favor of Mooney. We therefore affirm the judgment.

The record shows that Mooney bought his Rottweiler dog, Malik, in 1994. He had previously owned two other…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lau's Corp., Inc. v. HaskinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1991
  2. Banks v. AdairCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1978
  3. Torrance v. BrennanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1993
  4. Chrysler Corp. v. MarinariCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1985
  5. Freeman v. FarrCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1987

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Steagald v. EasonSupreme Court of Georgia · 2017
  2. Huff v. DyerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2009
  3. Raith v. BlanchardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2005
  4. Moore-Sapp Investors v. RichardsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1999
  5. Stennette v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2012

11 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