0 results for ''Freeman Mathis Gary''
Insurer's Prejudgment Interest Calculated by Payment Due Date, Not Original Denial of Claim
In part, Meridian argued that the Batstones miscalculated the prejudgment interest by calculating them from the date of the defendants' original denial. The judge agreed.
Modi v. India-American Cultural Association
Publication Date: 2024-02-14 Practice Area: Business Torts
Industry: Non-Profit
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals Judge: Judge Brown Attorneys: For plaintiff: Girish Modi, Decatur, for appellant. For defendant: Leo Kogan, (Freeman Mathis & Gary), Atlanta, for appellee. Case number: A23A1569
Court affirms liability for an attorney fee award in a case involving violations of an organization's bylaws, but remands for specific assessment of fees in relation to sanctionable conduct
Collington v. Clayton County, et al.
Publication Date: 2024-02-06 Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: Georgia Supreme Court Judge: Justice LaGrua Attorneys: For plaintiff: John David Hadden, Darren Wade Penn, (Penn Law LLC), Atlanta, Benjamin Frederick Windham, (Ben F. Windham, P.C.), Locust Grove, Robert Walker Garrett, (Morgan & Morgan Atlanta, PLLC), Columbus, for appellant. For defendant: Jack R. Hancock, Arash Ali Sabzevari, Wes C. Jackson, Jacob Edward Daly, (Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP), Atlanta, for appellee; Charles Madden Cork, III, (LAW OFFICES OF CHARLES M. Cork, III), Decatur, for Amicus Appellant; Kellye C. Moore, (Walker Hulbert Gray & Moore, LLP), Perry, for Amicus Appellee; Daniel C. Prout, Jr., (Waldon Adelman Castilla McNamara & Prout), Atlanta, for Other Party. Case number: S22G1146
Court verifies that OCGA § 36-11-1 applies to official-capacity claims against county sheriffs, and rules that presenting the claim to a county governing authority satisfies the presentment requirement
County or Sheriff? Georgia Supreme Court Ruling Provides Clarity in Presentment Dispute
"[B]ringing claims against the appropriate government officials in their official capacities was a recognized way to proceed against a governmental entity—be it the State or one of its counties," read the high court opinion.
A 2023 Georgia High Court Ruling Is Now Playing Out in Plaintiffs' Favor
The Supreme Court of Georgia ruling that clarified that 'use' of a motor vehicle 'is not limited by statute terms 'actively in use' 'as a vehicle' is impacting subsequent sovereign immunity challenges involving law enforcement.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
California Premises Liability Law
Authors: Jayme C. Long
View this Book
View more book results for the query "'Freeman Mathis Gary'"
$2M DeKalb Settlement Reached Amid 'Unique Premises Liability Issues'
"This was an interesting case because the complex admitted superior knowledge of the creek's existence, but denied it was a legal hazard, or that they were responsible for Damaria's death," plaintiff counsel Arthur R. York told the Daily Report.
Wilson et al. v. Inthachak et al.
Publication Date: 2024-01-12 Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry: Health Care
Court: Georgia Supreme Court Judge: Justice Warren Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ranse Murphy Partin, William Kent Owens, Jr., James Thomas Cox, (Conley Griggs Partin LLP), Atlanta, James D. Hudson, (James D. Hudson, P.C.), Douglas, for appellant. For defendant: William Richard Dekle, Sr., Sandra E. Vinueza Foster, Wiley A. Wasden, III, (Brennan & Wasden LLP), Savannah, for appellee; Jarome Gautreaux, (Gautreaux Law, LLC), Macon, for Amicus Appellant; Gregory Gaines Sewell, (Bouhan Falligant, LLP), Savannah, Pamela Newsom Lee, (Swift, Currie, McGhee & Hiers LLP), Atlanta, Elissa Blache Haynes, (Freeman Mathis & GARY, LLP), Atlanta, Patrick N. Silloway, (Balch & Bingham, LLP), Atlanta, Philip C. Thompson, (Duane Morris LLP), Atlanta, for Amicus Appellee. Case number: S23A1095
Court returns case to appellate court, which was divided equally on the application of a particular issue, due to lack of equal division jurisdiction
Looking Back at the Law Firms That Didn't Survive 2023
From Stroock to Schnader, firms that failed struggled with common issues of recruitment, retention and financial obligations.
Horne v. Edwards
Publication Date: 2023-12-18 Practice Area: Government
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: Appellate Division Judge: Judge Marczyk Attorneys: For plaintiff: Bryce Wallace Newell (Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP, attorneys; Bryce Wallace Newell, on the briefs) For defendant: Scott D. Salmon (Jardim, Meisner & Susser, PC, attorneys; Scott D. Salmon, of counsel and on the brief; John J. Zunin and Alexa Foster, on the brief); Paul R. Adezio, Mercer County Counsel (Paul R. Adezio, on the statement in lieu of brief) Case number: A-2619-22
Trial Court Correctly Dismissed Petition Challenging Candidacies Due to Insufficient Number of Voter Signatures
'Not A Lot of Deal Work': Law Firms Add More Litigators Compared With Corporate Laterals
Southeast law firms are being cautious amid continued economic uncertainty, adding more lawyers in counter-cyclical practice areas than those in transactional.TRENDING STORIES
More from ALM
- Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference Midwest 2024: Mike Andolina, Partner, White & Case 1 minute read
- Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference Midwest 2024: Carolyn Burbrink, Uber Director of Volume Mobility Safety and Insurance Litigation 1 minute read
- Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference Midwest 2024: Vaishali Rao, Hinshaw & Culbertson Partner 1 minute read
Resources
Corporate Transparency Act Resource Kit
Brought to you by Wolters Kluwer
Download Now
Revenue, Profit, Cash: Managing Law Firms for Success
Brought to you by Juris Ledger
Download Now
Law Firm Operational Considerations for the Corporate Transparency Act
Brought to you by Wolters Kluwer
Download Now
The Ultimate Guide to Remote Legal Work
Brought to you by Filevine
Download Now