City of Buford v. Ward
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAndrews, Judge
I respectfully concur in Divisions 2 through 5. Nonetheless, I dissent from Division 1, in which the majority concludes that plaintiff proved a cause of action against Peevy and Garrett under OCGA § 36-33-4. Peevy and Garrett implemented a broadly-drafted City policy which allowed them to exercise discretion. The opinion states that “these differences in application of the policy demonstrate the problem of unfettered discretion on the part of officials without the benefit of specific written guidelines.” (Majority op., p. 754.)
Although the discretion allowed under the policy may be less than…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Toomey v. Norwood Realty Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1955
- Friedman v. GoodmanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1963
- Foskey v. KirklandSupreme Court of Georgia · 1966
- City of Hawkinsville v. Wilson & Wilson, Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1973
- Reynolds v. Board of CommissionersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1986
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.