Age.2d 448 (1987)

– Considering the disagreement between your experts’ testimony towards a seemingly risky reputation, in addition to inferences getting taken from the lack of prior crashes, a point of facts is available whether or not a flawed position stayed and therefore the newest defendant, in the get it done out of average care in keeping the brand new defendant’s properties safer about more thirty years the brand new defendant have had the TheLuckyDate newest premises, know otherwise have to have recognized would end up in damage to an invitee. Haire v. City of Macon, 2 hundred Ga. Application. 744, 409 S.Elizabeth.2d 670, cert. refuted, two hundred Ga. Software. 896, 409 S.Age.2d 670 (1991).

– In a case where in actuality the issue is if among the newest people met with the necessary mental capacity to generate a binding agreement, viewpoint proof cannot approve new grant away from summation view you to such as for example party try skilled. McCraw v. Watkins, 242 Ga. 452, 249 S.Elizabeth.2d 202 (1978).

– Legitimate problem of truth is maybe not elevated by seller’s own affidavit as to what property value property inside the a suit having particular overall performance. Baker v. Jellibeans, Inc., 252 Ga. 458, 314 S.E.2d 874 (1984).

– If respondent files an enthusiastic affidavit saying the new respondent’s viewpoint you to the marriage isn’t irretrievably busted hence you’ll find genuine applicants for reconciliation, following summation wisdom are going to be refused. Bryan v. Bryan, 248 Ga. 312, 282 S.Elizabeth.2d 892 (1981).

Because of the expectation you to legal counsel are carried out during the a standard skilled trend, the fresh movant is then required to make an enthusiastic expert’s affidavit, until there clearly was “obvious and palpable” negligence. Continue reading →