Georgia CommonsBuscar en todas las colecciones
Buscar en Georgia Commons
Proyectos de ley, opiniones de la Corte Suprema, el Código y las dos constituciones, y transcripciones de las reuniones de la Cámara y el Senado, en una sola búsqueda. Pregunte con palabras sencillas: la búsqueda ordena los pasajes por su significado y también por sus palabras.
Filtros:2020 Quitar filtros
Se encontraron 138 documentos.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 18 de mayo de 2020
San Miguel Produce, Inc. v. L.G. Herndon Jr. Farms, Inc
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia respondió tres preguntas certificadas sobre la ley de licencias de comerciantes agrícolas de Georgia, resolviendo que una empresa de productos agrícolas que actúa como comerciante debe tener licencia y que no obtenerla puede impedirle hacer cumplir un contrato comercial ante los tribunales.
a regulatory measure in the public interest and not a mere revenue measure. This Act requires more than the mere obtaining of a business license and a mere reading of the Act discloses without contradiction that it is an enactment for the protection of the public and a recognition that unless such employment agencies are solvent and operated by persons of...
Georgia’s Act imposes a similar, though not identical, licensing system upon dealers in agricultural products who engage in such business in Georgia.4 Subject to the exemptions in OCGA § 2-9-15, a “dealer in agricultural products,” as that term is defined in OCGA § 2-9-1 (2), is required to obtain a license from the Commissioner of Agriculture. See OCGA §...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de diciembre de 2020
Nuckles v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un video de cámara oculta en la habitación de un paciente de un asilo de ancianos puede usarse como prueba contra una enfermera acusada en su muerte, porque el paciente contaba como ocupante de la propiedad y la enfermera no tenía una expectativa razonable de privacidad mientras trabajaba allí.
2. With regard to her first contention, Nuckles argues that the phrase “owner or occupier of real property,” regardless of its context, is a legal term of art referring only to a person who has ultimate control over the property and is responsible for its maintenance, protection, and guests. Because Dempsey had no such control of, or responsibility for, the...
10 See, e.g., OCGA § 16-1-3 (10) (defining the term “owner” as used in Title 16 as “a person who has a right to possession of property which is superior to that of a person who takes, uses, obtains, or withholds it from him and which the person taking, using, obtaining, or withholding is not privileged to infringe.”). adopted the Security Exception as...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 18 de mayo de 2020
In the Matter of Howard L. Sosnik
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia suspendió a un abogado de Georgia por seis meses como disciplina reciproca después de que Nueva York lo disciplinara por no supervisar la cuenta de fideicomiso de su firma de abogados, lo que permitió que un empleado se apropiara indebidamente de fondos de clientes.
PER CURIAM. This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the petition for voluntary discipline filed by Howard L. Sosnik (State Bar No. 667258) under Bar Rule 4-227 (b), in which he seeks a six-month suspension as reciprocal discipline for a six-month suspension imposed in New York. See In the Matter of Sosnik, 173 AD3d 137 (N.Y. App. Div., May 29, 2019)...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 13 de enero de 2020
Davis v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena de Carlton Davis por asesinato en grado de delito grave, rechazando sus alegatos sobre una declaración forzada, una carta admitida indebidamente y una demora de 14 años en decidir su moción de nuevo juicio.
3. Davis argues that the trial court improperly admitted as evidence at trial a letter that Liberty County jail personnel opened, violating his reasonable expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment. However, because the record shows that opening the letter was for security and maintenance purposes, rather than for prosecutorial purposes, the search...
Franks testified that “[i]n all cases, . . . all mail that comes into the jail is [opened and] monitored for contraband . . . unless it’s marked from an attorney.” He also confirmed that, in this case, what they “essentially . . . were concerned with . . . [was] investigating inside the letter to find out who the letter actually like a suicide. The letter...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 29 de junio de 2020
FRAZEN v. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ATLANTA
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la aprobación por un tribunal de primera instancia de hasta $1.25 mil millones en bonos de ingresos para ayudar a financiar el proyecto de reurbanización de The Gulch en el centro de Atlanta, rechazando los reclamos de ciudadanos contra el proceso y la estructura de financiamiento.
Citing cases such as Tyree v. Jackson, 226 Ga. 690, 694 (2) (177 SE2d 160) (1970), and Titelman v. Stedman, 277 Ga. 460, 461 (591 SE2d 774) (2003), the Intervenors nonetheless contend that they could not have become parties and the trial could not have begun until the trial court entered a written order granting their intervention. The cases cited by the...
IT IS FURTHER DECLARED, ORDERED, AND ADJUDGED, as a matter of fact and law, that both the issuance of the EZ Bonds and the security therefor, are sound, feasible and reasonable, as demonstrated by the evidence adduced at the hearing, including the fact that the bonds will be issued only upon proof of work completed and expenditures made[.] Isolating this...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 4 de mayo de 2020
Hill v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia revocó la condena por asesinato de un hombre del condado de Chattooga porque el tribunal de primera instancia lo obligó a sentarse ante el jurado con esposas, una cadena en la cintura y grilletes en las piernas sin una justificación adecuada ni consideración de alternativas menos restrictivas.
A trial court’s decision to shackle a defendant “‘must be subjected to close judicial scrutiny to determine if there was an essential state interest furthered by compelling a defendant to wear shackles and whether less restrictive, less prejudicial methods of restraint were considered or could have been employed.’” United States v. Durham, 287 F3d 1297,...
The record is mostly silent as to what was included in the trial court’s first security plan and why the trial court came to its security decision. Although the trial court referenced numerous pre-trial meetings and hearings in support of its decision to keep Hill visibly shackled, neither the transcripts of those hearings nor the security plan itself are...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 1 de julio de 2020
Middleton v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia resolvió que un hombre condenado tanto por secuestrar un vehículo como por recibir ese mismo vehículo robado no puede mantener legalmente ambas condenas, porque los dos veredictos se contradicen entre sí. La corte también sostuvo que él no necesitaba objetar en el juicio para plantear el problema más adelante.
4 See Code 1863, §§ 4382, 4383; Code 1868, §§ 4420, 4421; Code 1873, §§ 4488, 4489; Code 1882, §§ 4488, 4489; Penal Code 1895, §§ 171, 172; Penal Code 1910, §§ 168, 169; Code 1933, §§ 26-2620, 26-2621; Code 1933, § 26-1806. Georgia courts held that a person could not be convicted for both taking and receiving the same property. See Minor v. State, 58 Ga....
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 5 de octubre de 2020
Glenn v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que el derecho de derecho común de Georgia a resistir un arresto ilegal también permite que una persona use fuerza proporcional contra la propiedad del gobierno, como un vehículo policial, mientras intenta escapar de una detención ilegal.
16 Blackstone wrote: The confinement of a person, in any wise, is an imprisonment. So that . . . arresting or forcibly detaining him in the street, is an imprisonment. . . . To make imprisonment lawful, it must either be by process from the courts of judicature, or by warrant from some legal officer having authority to commit to prison; which warrant must...
18 Blackstone wrote: When a delinquent is arrested by any of the means [authorized], he ought regularly to be carried before a justice of the peace. . . . The justice, before whom such prisoner is brought, is bound immediately to examine the circumstances of the crime alleged: and to this end by statute . . . he is to take in writing the examination of such...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 5 de octubre de 2020
Premier Health Care Investments, LLC v. Uhs of Anchor, L.P
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que una agencia estatal de salud excedió su autoridad al exigir a un hospital obtener un nuevo permiso antes de reasignar camas existentes a un programa psiquiátrico, porque la ley estatal no incluye la reasignación de camas entre lo que requiere esa aprobación.
More recently, however, we construed “including” in context as a term of expansion. In Wetzel, we held that “including,” as used in a statute prohibiting the electronic furnishing of obscene material to minors, introduced a non-exhaustive list of how someone could make such material available to minors.9 There, we reasoned that “including” was “followed by...
4. Conclusion. Based on the foregoing analysis, we hold that OCGA § 31-6-40 (a) provides an exhaustive list of new institutional health services for which a CON is required. The General Assembly’s delegation of legislative authority to the Department to promulgate rules as part of its administration of the CON program does not include the authority to...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 15 de julio de 2020
In the Matter of Neil Richard Flit
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia aceptó la solicitud de un abogado del área de Atlanta de renunciar a su licencia después de admitir que retuvo fondos de acuerdos de clientes durante años sin pagarlos ni explicar qué pasó con el dinero.
PER CURIAM. This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the report of the special master, who recommends that the Court accept the petition for voluntary surrender of license filed by Neil Richard Flit (State Bar No. 091307) after the filing of a formal complaint, pursuant to Bar Rule 4-227 (c). In his petition, Flit requested that he be allowed to...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 28 de septiembre de 2020
Eggleston v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato mediante delito grave de un hombre del condado de Stewart por matar a su vecino, al determinar que el testimonio directo y las pruebas forenses le dieron al jurado suficiente base para condenarlo más allá de toda duda razonable.
In July 2015, Eggleston went before the judge again to note that Byrd was late on his rent and to request a dispossessory warrant. Byrd was served with a dispossessory warrant on July 6. timely notice of appeal on February 4, 2020, and the case was docketed in this Court to the August 2020 term and submitted for a decision on the briefs. In response, Byrd...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 29 de junio de 2020
BOWDEN v. THE MEDICAL CENTER (And Vice Versa)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que una demanda colectiva contra un hospital de Georgia por sus tarifas de facturación no podía proceder, y que los pacientes sin seguro no podían demandar por fraude, tergiversación negligente ni crimen organizado solo porque el hospital cobró su tarifa estándar.
In order to perfect [a hospital] lien provided for in Code Section 44-14-470, the operator of the hospital . . . [s]hall file in the office of the clerk of the superior court of the county in which the hospital . . . is located and in the [Georgia] county wherein the patient resides . . . a verified statement setting forth . . . the amount claimed to be due...
In order to perfect the lien provided for in Code Section 44- 14-470, the operator of the hospital, nursing home, physician practice, or provider of traumatic burn care medical practice: (1) Shall, not less than 15 days prior to the date of filing the statement required under paragraph (2) of this subsection, provide written notice to the patient and, to...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 1 de junio de 2020
Global Payments, Inc. v. Incomm Financial Services, Inc
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un procesador de pagos no puede ser demandado por tergiversación negligente simplemente por transmitir datos fraudulentos de reembolso que recibió de comerciantes, porque nunca afirmó que los datos fueran exactos.
InComm issues pre-paid debit and credit cards under the “Vanilla VISA” brand to cardholders who use the cards to buy goods and services. Global is a financial data payment processor. Global provides its clients, primarily merchants, with payment technology hardware and software that allows them to accept card payments and to communicate electronically with...
308 Ga. 842 FINAL COPY S19G1000. GLOBAL PAYMENTS, INC. v. INCOMM FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 12 de noviembre de 2020
Inquiry Concerning Judge Robert M. Crawford
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia desestimó un caso de disciplina judicial contra un exjuez del tribunal superior del Circuito de Griffin, y se negó a imponer una prohibición de por vida para ocupar cargos judiciales luego de que él ya había renunciado.
1. At the direction of the JQC’s Investigative Panel, the Director filed a formal complaint against Crawford. The complaint alleged that Crawford violated CJC Rule 1.1 in two ways: (1) by “impermissibly converting money from the registry of the Superior Court of Pike County . . . when he ordered the Pike County Clerk via handwritten note to disburse...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 27 de enero de 2020
Redding v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de un hombre del condado de DeKalb, rechazando las alegaciones de que su abogado defensor arruinó el contrainterrogatorio de dos testigos y de que el juez de primera instancia bloqueó indebidamente pruebas de impugnación.
307 Ga. 722 FINAL COPY S19A1302. REDDING v. THE STATE.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 24 de agosto de 2020
SYNOVUS BANK D/B/A FIRST COMMUNITY BANK OF TIFTON v. KELLEY
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia resolvió que un acreedor con sentencia no obtiene un gravamen sobre el bien inmueble del deudor hasta que la sentencia sea realmente inscrita en el condado donde se encuentra el bien, no cuando el tribunal dicta la sentencia por primera vez.
FINAL COPY 309 Ga. 654 S20Q0843. SYNOVUS BANK v. KELLEY.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 13 de enero de 2020
Harris v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de un hombre del condado de Cobb, al no hallar error manifiesto en la admisión de sus declaraciones previas al juicio ante la policía ni asistencia ineficaz en el manejo por parte de su abogado de su decisión de hablar con los detectives.
On December 31, Harris, who is deaf, sent text messages to Neil, and the two negotiated a price for sex acts. Harris was not informed that he was texting with Neil, as Neil pretended to be James. Unbeknownst to Harris, Neil watched from his car in the hotel parking lot as Harris arrived at the hotel just prior to 4:00 a.m. on January 1, 2013. Neil sent...
But when, as in this case, the trial court has neither been briefed on nor apprised of any specific objection to the admission of the defendant’s statements, then the trial court cannot have made a definitive ruling with respect to the unmade objection. Moreover, the court’s ruling did not relieve Harris of his obligation to object to the admission of his...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 21 de diciembre de 2020
In the Matter of Christopher John Palazzola
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia suspendió al abogado de Atlanta Christopher Palazzola del ejercicio del derecho, pero como ya había dejado de ejercer voluntariamente el 1 de junio de 2020, la suspensión se aplicó retroactivamente y fue reincorporado de inmediato con condiciones que exigen una revisión de gestión de la práctica jurídica.
Recognizing that other states also have attorney disciplinary systems, we also have looked outside Georgia for guidance. The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, on which many states’ professional conduct rules are generally based, includes a rule with language similar — but not identical — to Georgia’s Rule 8.4 (a) (4). ABA Model Rule 8.4 (c) provides:...
(c) Retirement accounts. Palazzola promised the two attorney associates mentioned above that he would set up retirement accounts for them and that his law firm would match their respective contributions up to a certain percentage of salary. Palazzola then caused the retirement account contributions to be withheld from their salaries according to their...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 10 de febrero de 2020
In the Matter of Melvin T. Johnson
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia inhabilitó al abogado Melvin T. Johnson tras determinar que descuidó repetidamente a sus clientes, manejó mal fondos de clientes, falsificó documentos e ignoró el proceso disciplinario del Colegio de Abogados del Estado en cinco casos distintos.
comply with discovery where trial court can otherwise determine willfulness on the part of the party against whom the sanctions are sought). Accordingly, there was no abuse of the special master’s discretion in striking Johnson’s answers and finding him in default as a sanction for failure to engage in discovery. See, e.g., In the Matter of Jefferson, 307...
As did the special master, we look to the American Bar Association’s Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions (1992), see In the Matter of Morse, 266 Ga. 652, 653 (470 SE2d 232) (1996), and find the following aggravating circumstances present: prior disciplinary offenses (a Formal Letter of Admonition and two Investigative Panel Reprimands in 2006); a...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 6 de abril de 2020
In the Matter of Matthew A. Dickason
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia aceptó la solicitud de un abogado del área de Atlanta para renunciar a su licencia de abogado después de que admitiera no haber rendido cuentas de los fondos fiduciarios de clientes vinculados a cierres de bienes raíces.
308 Ga. 411 FINAL COPY S19Y1450. IN THE MATTER OF MATTHEW A. DICKASON.
Afinar los resultados
Los números cuentan los documentos que encontró esta búsqueda.