Legal Opinion

Urrea v. Flythe

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided October 31, 1994No. A94A1889PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Birdsong, Presiding Judge.

Appellants/plaintiffs filed a renewal suit under the provisions of OCGA § 9-2-61, after their original suit was dismissed. The original invasion of privacy suit was filed and process served upon an employee at the defendant’s residence before expiration of the statute of limitation. Defendant also was personally served with process approximately three-and-one-half months after expiration of the statute of limitation. The record does not reveal the basis upon which the origi*213nal suit was dismissed.

Decided October 31, 1994 Reconsideration denied November 14, 1994. Adam…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hobbs v. ArthurSupreme Court of Georgia · 1994
  2. Hobbs v. ArthurCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1993
  3. Swartzel v. GarnerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1989
  4. Osborne v. HughesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1991
  5. Wofford v. Central Mutual Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Georgia · 1978

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Black v. KnightCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1998
  2. In Re Estate of Kevin Lee HansonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API