Legal Opinion · Dissent

City of Gainesville v. Jack Waldrip

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 16, 2018No. A17A1946Published

1DissentMcFadden, Presiding Judge

I respectfully dissent. I agree with the city that it is entitled to summary judgment on any claims seeking damages for incidents that occurred more than four years before the filing of the lawsuit, because those claims are barred by the statute of limitation. But as for the remaining claims, the plaintiffs ("Waldrip") presented sufficient evidence to create factual questions as to whether the city had a duty to Waldrip, whether the city caused the flooding, whether Waldrip put the city on notice of the condition that was causing the flooding, and whether Waldrip was entitled to bad faith…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Bass Canning Co. v. MacDougald Construction Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1932
  2. City of Columbus v. BarngroverCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
  3. Bailey v. Annistown Road Baptist Church, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2009
  4. City of Atlanta v. Hofrichter/StiakakisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2008
  5. Sumitomo Corp. of America v. DealCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2002

8 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