Legal Opinion

Paul Seckinger v. the Zurich Services Corporation

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided April 10, 2015No. A14A1911; A14A1912; A14A1913; A14A1914PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McFADDEN, Judge.

These appeals are from trial court orders granting summary judgment to defendants in a negligent inspection case arising out of the catastrophic explosion of a sugar refinery plant operated by the Imperial Sugar Company. Because the trial court correctly found that there exists no genuine issue of material fact, we affirm.

To prevail on a motion for summary judgment, the moving party must demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. A defendant may do this by either presenting evidence negating an…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Huggins v. Aetna Casualty & Surety CompanySupreme Court of Georgia · 1980
  2. Baskin v. Georgia Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2005
  3. Davenport v. Cummins Alabama, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2007
  4. Finley v. LehmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1995
  5. Guideone Mutual Insurance v. HunterCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2007

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Garvin v. Atlanta Gas Light CompanyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2015
  2. GARLAND FAVORITO v. ALEX WANCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2022
  3. TACTICAL SECURITY GROUP, LLC v. CYNTHIA WELCHCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API