Georgia Supreme Court - Marietta Attorneys Dean Phillips Law Office

Secondhand Asbestos Case Evaluated by Supreme Court of Georgia

December 9, 2016 No Comments

A Georgia woman who developed mesothelioma after years of exposure to asbestos dust from her father’s work clothes brought her case before the Georgia Supreme Court. The Court ruled that the manufacturer had no duty to warn of unforeseeable exposure but allowed her defective design claim to proceed under the state’s risk-utility test. The decision underscores how Georgia courts balance liability, product design, and duty of care — key factors in personal injury and toxic exposure cases across Cobb, Bartow, and Paulding Counties.

Judicial Qualifications Commission May Have Overstepped

December 8, 2016 No Comments

The Georgia Supreme Court recently questioned whether the Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) exceeded its authority when advising judges on courtroom security and public access. The Court found that the Commission’s opinion on restricting court entry “wandered into a field of law that is unclear and unsettled.” This case highlights the ongoing tension between judicial oversight and independence in Georgia’s courts — an issue with implications for legal professionals and defendants across Cobb, Bartow, and Paulding Counties.

Blame for an Electrocution Rests with Georgia’s Supreme Court

December 5, 2016 No Comments

A tragic workplace electrocution case in Georgia has made its way to the state’s Supreme Court after lower courts disagreed on liability. The victim, left severely disabled after a power accident, claimed that mislabeled circuit breakers caused the incident, while the employer argued he failed to shut off the power. The Georgia Supreme Court’s decision will help clarify how courts evaluate negligence and summary judgment in workplace injury and personal injury lawsuits across Cobb, Bartow, and Paulding Counties.

Georgia’s Supreme Court Reviews Child Custody Case

October 10, 2016 No Comments

The Georgia Supreme Court has reaffirmed a Cobb County Superior Court decision that awarded custody of three children to their maternal grandparents. The ruling came after the Georgia Court of Appeals initially reversed the trial court’s decision, returning custody to the mother. The Supreme Court determined that the Appeals Court disregarded substantial evidence supporting the grandparents’ suitability, emphasizing the importance of evidence-based custody rulings in Georgia courts.

Georgia’s Supreme Court Denies Immunity to Doctor Who Overrode Advance Directive

September 22, 2016 No Comments

The Georgia Supreme Court ruled that a doctor and hospital could not claim immunity after allegedly ignoring a patient’s advance directive in a medical malpractice case.

The lawsuit stemmed from a Richmond County case in which a doctor intubated and placed a 91-year-old woman on life support against her health care agent’s wishes. The plaintiff, her granddaughter, argued this act caused unnecessary suffering and violated Georgia’s Advance Directive Act.

Both the trial court and Court of Appeals found that the doctor failed to act in good faith, as required by O.C.G.A. § 31-32-10, and the Supreme Court agreed, emphasizing that medical decisions should reflect the patient’s will—not the provider’s.

This case reinforces the importance of patient autonomy and the legal obligations of healthcare providers in Georgia when following advance directives.

Boundaries for Campus Police Jurisdiction

August 8, 2016 No Comments

The Supreme Court of Georgia recently clarified the limits of campus police authority in DUI and traffic-related arrests. The ruling arose from a Cobb County State Court case, where a Kennesaw State University police officer arrested a driver off campus for DUI, failing to maintain lane, and operating without headlights.

Qualifications of Expert Witness

August 1, 2016 No Comments

The Supreme Court of Georgia recently clarified the qualifications required for expert witnesses in medical malpractice cases.

The case originated in DeKalb Superior Court, where the trial judge dismissed a lawsuit after ruling that the expert witness did not meet the requirements of O.C.G.A. § 9-11-9.1(a). The Court of Appeals upheld that decision, but the Georgia Supreme Court found procedural errors and returned the case to the lower court for reconsideration.

Time Taken for Drug-Sniffing Dog Not Enough to Block Motion to Suppress

August 1, 2016 No Comments

The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that a drug-sniffing dog’s involvement in a traffic stop did not violate the defendants’ Fourth Amendment rights, reversing earlier decisions from the trial and appellate courts.

The case began after police stopped two men for a lane change violation. During a routine identity check, the officer’s K-9 unit detected drugs, leading to the discovery of nearly ten pounds of marijuana. The defendants argued that the stop was unlawfully prolonged while waiting for dispatch to verify an out-of-state license.

Evidence Supports Convictions in Spite of Defendant’s Protestations against Trial Court Procedures

July 21, 2016 No Comments

The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a malice murder conviction in a Chatham County case involving a defendant accused of beating his wife to death. The defendant appealed, arguing that the trial court made multiple procedural errors.

The Georgia Supreme Court ruled that the evidence of prior domestic violence was properly admitted under the new Evidence Code, which allows for testimony on prior acts to establish a pattern of behavior. The Court also addressed the use of residual hearsay, finding that any potential error in admitting it did not harm the fairness of the trial.

Georgia’s Supreme Court Weighs Factors of Effective Counsel

July 21, 2016 No Comments

The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed a Gwinnett County murder case involving claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The defendant, convicted of malice murder, burglary, and multiple firearm charges, sought a new trial, alleging that his attorney’s performance had compromised his defense.

The Court found no evidence supporting the defendant’s claims. The justices ruled that the trial attorney’s strategic decisions, including his approach to witness testimony and handling of procedural issues, were reasonable and did not constitute ineffective representation.