Legal Opinion

Garrett v. Panacon Corp.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 9, 1974No. 48478PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hall, Presiding Judge.

1. Here, appellant urges that her suit states a cause of action under the 1968 amendment to Code Ann. § 105-106, and that this is not a suit brought under the rule that a contractor may be liable for defective work even after the owner has accepted the work provided the defect is inherently or imminently dangerous. For this reason, her complaint is said to state a cause of action despite her failure to allege the inherent or imminent dangerousness of the defect. Panacon contests the applicability of the statute to these facts, arguing that the roofing material had been…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Hunt v. Star Photo Finishing Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
  2. Cox v. Ray M. Lee Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1959
  3. Simmons Company v. HardinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1947
  4. Chitty v. Horne-Wilson, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1955
  5. Shell v. WattsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Seely v. Loyd H. Johnson Const. Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1996
  2. Derryberry v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
  3. Patterson v. Professional Resources, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
  4. Tensar Earth Technologies, Inc. v. City of AtlantaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2004
  5. Russell v. Cynwid InvestmentsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977

3 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