Corbin v. Pilgrim Realty Company

1 Citing case

  1. Miller Grading c. v. Ga. Fed. c. Assn

    247 Ga. 730 (Ga. 1981)   Cited 42 times

    the depositions and possible other materials not considered below, and since the party opposing the motion for summary judgment is to be given the benefit of all reasonable doubts in determining whether a genuine issue of material fact exists ( Burnette Ford, Inc. v. Hayes, 227 Ga. 551 ( 181 S.E.2d 866); Capital Auto Co. v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., 119 Ga. App. 186 ( 166 S.E.2d 584)), it is our view that the judgment must be reversed and the case remanded for the trial court to enter a new order after taking into consideration `the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any...' CPA § 56 (c) (Code Ann. § 81A-156 (c))... This court does not have original jurisdiction to determine motions for summary judgment, and the case must be remanded to the trial court for proper consideration and disposition under CPA § 56." The rule announced in Jackson has been applied in several subsequent Court of Appeals cases (see Corbin v. Pilgrim Realty Co., 151 Ga. App. 102 ( 258 S.E.2d 758) (1979); Walker v. General Motors Corp., 149 Ga. App. 524 ( 254 S.E.2d 871) (1979), reversed s. c. 244 Ga. 191 ( 259 S.E.2d 449) (1979); Realty Contractors, Inc. v. C. S. Nat. Bank, 146 Ga. App. 69 ( 245 S.E.2d 342) (1978); Brown v. Rooks, 139 Ga. App. 770 ( 229 S.E.2d 548) (1976)), and is supportive of appellant's position. We, however, must take a different view. "[I]t is well settled that, on appeal, the burden is on the appellant to establish error."