Coen v. Aptean, Inc.

6 Citing cases

  1. Golden v. Floyd Healthcare Mgmt.

    368 Ga. App. 409 (Ga. Ct. App. 2023)   Cited 6 times
    In Golden, the court held clearly that “statutes of repose are not included within the ambit of [these] emergency orders.

    (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Coen v. Aptean, Inc. , 356 Ga. App. 468, 470 (1), 847 S.E.2d 835 (2020) ; see also Aaron v. Jekyll Island-State Park Auth. , 348 Ga. App. 332, 334, 822 S.E.2d 829 (2019). Stated differently, "a defendant's liability cannot be enlarged beyond that indicated by the pleadings in the first case."

  2. Sisia v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

    No. 22-12833 (11th Cir. Apr. 18, 2023)   Cited 1 times

    Under Georgia law, a "properly filed renewal action stands on the same footing as the original action." Coen v. Aptean, Inc., 356 Ga.App. 468, 470 (2020) (quotation omitted). So "if a renewal action is properly filed within six months after dismissal of the original action, it remains viable even though the statute of limitation may have expired."

  3. Aydin v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp.

    Civil Action 1:21-cv-03269-SDG (N.D. Ga. Sep. 29, 2022)

    Such claims are plainly distinct from the one Aydin originally asserted. “[I]f a plaintiff files a renewal suit after the applicable limitations period has expired and adds a new cause of action based on a new theory of recovery, the renewal statute is inapplicable to save [the] claim from being time-barred.” Coen v. Aptean, Inc., 356 Ga.App. 468, 470 (2020) (internal quotation marks omitted) (second alteration in original) (citation omitted). Here, since Counts III (vicarious liability) and IV (negligent supervision) were not brought until well beyond two years after Aydin was injured, they are time-barred.

  4. Green v. Ga. Dep't of Corr.

    No. A22A0930 (Ga. Ct. App. Oct. 12, 2022)

    A "properly filed renewal action stands on the same footing as the original action with respect to statute of limitation." Coen v. Aptean, Inc., 356 Ga.App. 468, 479 (1) (847 S.E.2d 835) (2020). Thus, "if a renewal action is properly filed within six months after dismissal of the original action, it remains viable even though the statute of limitation may have expired."

  5. Green v. Dep't of Corr.

    365 Ga. App. 592 (Ga. Ct. App. 2022)   Cited 1 times

    A "properly filed renewal action stands on the same footing as the original action with respect to statutes of limitation." Coen v. Aptean, Inc. , 356 Ga. App. 468, 470 (1), 847 S.E.2d 835 (2020). Thus, "if a renewal action is properly filed within six months after dismissal of the original action, it remains viable even though the statute of limitation may have expired."

  6. Sisia v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

    588 F. Supp. 3d 1320 (N.D. Ga. 2022)

    Accordingly, for Plaintiff's renewal action to be proper, the Complaint must be based on the medical expenses claim that remained pending in the Sisia I action at the time of her voluntary dismissal. SeeCoen v. Aptean, Inc., 356 Ga.App. 468, 847 S.E.2d 835, 838 (2020) ("to be a good renewal of an original suit, so as to suspend the running of the statute of limitations under O.C.G.A. § 9-2-61, the new petition must be substantially the same both as to the cause of action and as to the essential parties."); see also Compl.; [Doc. 5-6].