Legal Opinion · Dissent

Georgia Ports Authority v. Harris

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 30, 2000No. A99A2012, A99A2013Published

1DissentAndrews, Presiding Judge

I must respectfully dissent in Case No. A99A2012, because there was no compliance by William Harris with the ante litem notice requirements of OCGA § 50-21-26 (a).

Compliance by a plaintiff with the ante litem provisions of the statute is a question of subject matter jurisdiction. OCGA § 50-21-26 (a) (3) (“the courts shall have no jurisdiction . . . unless and until a written notice of claim has been timely presented to the state as provided in this subsection”) (emphasis supplied).

The trial court concluded that the Federal Express delivery initiated by attorney Bailey and mailing a copy by…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. O'Melveny & Myers v. Federal Deposit InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Norris v. Department of TransportationSupreme Court of Georgia · 1997
  3. Kim v. Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1998
  4. Joyner v. SchiessCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1999
  5. Five Star Steel Contractors, Inc. v. Colonial Credit UnionCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1993

4 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