Legal Opinion

Haughton v. Namano, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided August 30, 1996No. A96A1423PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Ruffin, Judge.

Namano, Inc. (“Namano”) sued James and Donna Haughton for money owed for jewelry they purchased on open account, and the Haughtons counterclaimed alleging usury. The trial court granted summary judgment to Namano on its claim and on the Haughtons’ counterclaim. The Haughtons appeal from that order, and for reasons which follow, we affirm in part and reverse in part.

The standard for a grant of summary judgment is found in Lau’s Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491 (405 SE2d 474) (1991). The moving party must “demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Lau's Corp., Inc. v. HaskinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1991
  2. Hardy v. G. A. C. Finance Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
  3. Walton v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1957
  4. Charles S. Martin Distributing Co. v. Bernhardt Furniture Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1994
  5. McNair v. GOLD KIST, INC.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1983

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Kent v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API