Legal Opinion

Hicks v. Newman

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 31, 2007No. A06A2119PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ruffin, Judge.

Following an automobile collision, Bobby Gene Hicks and Mary Lee Hicks (collectively, “the Hickses”) sued Donald Newman, the owner of the vehicle involved in the collision. After discovering that Newman’s adult son, Benjamin, was driving the vehicle, the Hickses amended their complaint, seeking to hold Newman liable under the family purpose doctrine. Newman moved for summary judgment on the basis that the doctrine was inapplicable. The trial court granted the motion, and this appeal followed. Finding no error, we affirm.

We review de novo a trial court’s grant of summary…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hurley v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2002
  2. Cannon v. Wesley Plantation ApartmentsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2002
  3. Collins v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2002

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. McBee v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2009
  2. Daniel v. Allstate InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2008
  3. Vadde v. Bank of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2009
  4. Harris-Jackson v. City of CochranCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2007
  5. Pritchett v. AfzalCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2008

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