Legal Opinion · Dissent

LAW Et Al. v. CHEMTALL, INC.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided June 28, 2017No. A17A0321Published

1DissentBarnes, Presiding Judge

I agree with the majority’s analysis and conclusion regarding Chemtall’s duty to Law under the McClure test. However, the majority’s analysis regarding Law’s knowledge about the sodium hydroxide puddle, while persuasive, is not convincing, and thus, I must respectfully dissent. Although a close question, Chemtall was not entitled to a directed verdict because there was some evidence disputing whether Law possessed “full knowledge” of the potential chemical hazards at the tank farm. See McKinney v. Regents of the Univ. System of Ga., 284 Ga. App. 250, 252 (1) (643 SE2d 736) (2007). See…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Wood v. B&S Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2012
  2. Kroger Co. v. StricklandCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
  3. CHRYSLER GROUP, LLC v. WALDEN Et Al.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2016
  4. Prillaman v. SarkCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2002
  5. McKinney v. Regents of the University SystemCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API