Legal Opinion

Sanfrantello v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided July 16, 1968No. 43722PublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Bell, Presiding Judge.

1. On motion for summary judgment, the movant has the burden of showing the absence of any genuine issue of material fact, and the opposing party is given the benefit of all reasonable doubts and all favorable inferences that may be drawn from the evidence. Holland v. Sanfax Corp., 106 Ga. App. 1, 4 (126 SE2d 442); International Brotherhood v. Neivman, 116 Ga. App. 590, 592 (158 SE2d 298). The movant “has this burden even as to issues upon which the opposing party would have the trial burden. And the moving party’s papers are carefully scrutinized, while the opposing…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Holland v. Sanfax CorporationCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
  2. Colonial Stores, Inc. v. TurnerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
  3. Coleman v. AllenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
  4. Auld v. Colonial Stores Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1947
  5. International Brotherhood of Boilermakers v. NewmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967

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

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. Melton v. LaCalamitoCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1981
  2. Werbin & Tenenbaum, Inc. v. HeardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
  3. Brown v. SheffieldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
  4. Willis v. BrassellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1996
  5. Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Woolfolk Chemical Works, Ltd.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1970

43 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