Legal Opinion
Amend v. 485 Properties
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided March 13, 2006No. S05Q1462PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Thompson, Justice.
By way of Amend v. 485 Properties, 409 F3d 1288 (11th Cir. 2005), the United States Court of Appeals asked this Court to decide “whether procuring cause is an element of a quantum meruit claim under Georgia law.” In the context of this case, the short answer is “yes.” When a real estate broker brings a quantum meruit claim to *328recover the value of his services under Georgia law, he must prove that he was the procuring cause of the sale.
The facts giving rise to this question are set forth at length in Amend v. 485 Properties, 401 F3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2005). We summarize them as…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Sibbald v. . the Bethlehem Iron CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Hollifield v. Monte Vista Biblical Gardens, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
- Nestle Co. v. JH EWING & SON, INC.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
- Perimeter Realty v. Gapi, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2000
- Van C. Argiris & Co. v. FMC Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1986
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Johnson v. LarsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2010
- Georgia Real Estate Properties, Inc. v. LindwallCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2010
- Hemispherx Biopharma, Inc. v. Mid-South Capital, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2012
- Christie v. Rainmaster Irrigation, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2009
- Bollers v. Noir Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2009
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.