Legal Opinion

Fountain v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided May 21, 1986No. 71687PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Deen, Presiding Judge.

If Medieval theologians could detect “twenty-nine distinct dam-nations” in a single verse of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians, as recorded in the poet Browning’s “Soliloquy of the Spanish Cloister,”1 it should come as no surprise to members of another profession noted for drawing fine distinctions to receive a brief enumerating eighty (80) errors, derived from a 1,258-page trial transcript. Such is the situation in the appeal sub judice, in which Fountain, owner of a long-established but now defunct service station, appeals from the judgment in an inverse condemnation…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Tift County v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1963
  2. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority v. DatrySupreme Court of Georgia · 1975
  3. Department of Transportation v. WhiteheadSupreme Court of Georgia · 1984
  4. Dougherty County v. HornsbySupreme Court of Georgia · 1957
  5. Carver v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1983

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority v. FountainSupreme Court of Georgia · 1987
  2. Joseph v. BrayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1987
  3. T.J. Fountain, Jr., Individually and D/B/A Fountain Oil Company v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1988
  4. Stolz v. ShulmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1989
  5. Fountain v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1986

1 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