Legal Opinion

Hagemann v. City of Marietta

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided July 11, 2007No. A07A0493PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Phipps, Judge.

Bill Hagemann contends that the trial court erred by not striking counterclaims asserted against him by the City of Marietta, arguing that the counterclaims violate Georgia’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute, codified at OCGA § 9-li-li. 1. He contends also that the trial court erred by denying his motion for attorney fees under that statute. We agree with Hagemann that the counterclaims violate the statute and therefore reverse the contested rulings. On the issue of attorney fees, we remand this case for proceedings consistent with this…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Magnetic Resonance Plus, Inc. v. Imaging Systems InternationalSupreme Court of Georgia · 2001
  2. Berryhill v. Georgia Community Support & Solutions, Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 2006
  3. Metzler v. RowellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
  4. Atlanta Humane Society v. HarkinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 2004
  5. Gwinnett Commercial Bank v. FlakeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hindu Temple & Community Center of the High Desert, Inc. v. RaghunathanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2011
  2. Goldsmith v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2010
  3. Hagemann v. Berkman Wynhaven Associates, L.P.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2008
  4. Hagemann v. Berkman Wynhaven Associates, L.P.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2008
  5. Hagemann v. Berkman Wynhaven Associates, L.P.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API