Legal Opinion

Gore v. Davis

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided April 18, 1979No. 34437PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Undercofler, Presiding Justice.

Gore attacks the constitutionality of the Abandoned Motor Vehicles Act, Code Ann. § 68-2301 et seq. (Ga. L. 1972, p. 342; 1975, p. 913; 1977, p. 253) contending the due process requirements of the Georgia and United States Constitutions are offended because nowhere in the statute is there provision for judicial supervision, proper notice or for a hearing prior to or after the deprivation of property under a sale authorized by the Act. He claims the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the appellee in an action for wrongful conversion. We need look…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Flagg Bros., Inc. v. BrooksSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Sharrock v. Dell Buick-Cadillac, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1978
  3. Sikes v. PierceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1956
  4. King v. PateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1960
  5. Southern Railway Co. v. Town of TempleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1953

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Allstate Insurance v. AmmonsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1981
  2. Mapp v. First Georgia BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
  3. Arilotta v. First Georgia InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1986
  4. Gore v. DavisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1979

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API