Legal Opinion
Thomas v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided September 1, 2009No. A09A0933PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Doyle, Judge.
This appeal arises from a personal injury suit filed by Shelanda Thomas against Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (“MARTA”) and Schindler Elevator Corporation (“Schindler”). The trial court granted summary judgment to MARTA and Schindler, and Thomas appeals. For the reasons stated below, we reverse.
Summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. A de novo standard of review applies to an appeal from a grant of summary judgment, and we view the evidence, and all reasonable conclusions…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Matjoulis v. Integon General Ins. Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1997
- Layfield v. Department of TransportationSupreme Court of Georgia · 2006
- Roebuck v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2003
- Lane v. Montgomery Elevator Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1997
- Millar Elevator Service Co. v. O'SHIELDSCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1996
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Monitronics International, Inc. v. VeasleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2013
- Beach v. B. F. Saul Property Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2010
- Wheeler v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2010
- Mays v. Valley View Ranch, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2012
- Hill v. Kone, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2014
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.