Legal Opinion

Simpson v. Pendergast

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 14, 2008No. A07A1727PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ruffin, Judge.

Steve Simpson and Joseph Pendergast are two of the four shareholders in Historic Motorsports Holdings, Ltd. (“HMH”). Pen-dergast brought an action for declaratory judgment and specific performance against Simpson, seeking to require Simpson to sell his shares in HMH to Pendergast. The trial court granted summary judgment to Pendergast, finding that he “is entitled to specific performance by [Simpson] of [Simpson’s] obligation to close the sale of his shares to [Pendergast]Simpson appeals, and, for reasons that follow, we affirm in part and reverse in part.

Summary judgment is…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Holmes v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2007
  2. Thornton v. KumarCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1999
  3. Georgia Ass'n of Educators, Inc. v. Paragon Productions, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1999
  4. Henry v. BlankenshipCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2005
  5. Hibbard v. McMillanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2007

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Infinity General Insurance Co. v. LittonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2011
  2. Hampton Island, LLC v. HAOP, LLCCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2010
  3. Carroll v. Board of Regents of University SystemCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2013
  4. Global Ship Systems, LLC v. Continental Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2008
  5. Daniel L. Bommer v. George Remington ReynoldsCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2012

10 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