Evergreen Packaging, Inc. v. Prather

7 Citing cases

  1. McArthur v. Beech Haven Baptist Church of Athens

    361 Ga. App. 877 (Ga. Ct. App. 2021)   Cited 2 times
    Describing a lawsuit brought "against several defendants"

    Id. at 714-715 (1) (c), 850 S.E.2d 267. See Court of Appeals Rule 33.2 (a) (1) (a 2-1 decision issued after August 1, 2020 is binding precedent); Evergreen Packaging v. Prather , 318 Ga. App. 440, 445 n. 15, 734 S.E.2d 209 (2012) ("[W]e are never at liberty to ignore or disregard a binding precedent of this Court."). 3.

  2. Thomas v. State

    356 Ga. App. 817 (Ga. Ct. App. 2020)   Cited 1 times

    Accordingly, we will follow the holding and analysis of that case. See Evergreen Packaging, Inc. v. Prather , 318 Ga. App. 440, 445 n.15, 734 S.E.2d 209 (2012) ("Suffice it to say, we are never at liberty to ignore or disregard a binding precedent of this Court. A unanimous decision by a three-judge panel of this Court remains binding precedent until such time as it is modified or reversed by this Court en banc or our Supreme Court.") (citation omitted).

  3. Connolly v. Smock

    338 Ga. App. 754 (Ga. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 3 times
    Affirming a trial court’s grant of attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14 (b) when, "[i]n determining that Appellants’ conduct was improper, the trial court found that prior to the subject testimony, it had admonished [appellant’s] counsel that it would not allow irrelevant character evidence of the parties' statements or activities, and would not permit the parties to impugn each other’s character in front of the jury" (punctuation omitted)

    See Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Para. VI (“The decisions of the Supreme Court shall bind all other courts as precedents.”); see also Evergreen Packaging v. Prather , 318 Ga.App. 440, 445 n.15, 734 S.E.2d 209 (2012) (“A unanimous decision by a three-judge panel of this Court remains binding precedent until such time as it is modified or reversed by this Court en banc or our Supreme Court.”). The trial court's award then cannot be sustained because it (1) did not receive evidence as to the actual costs and reasonableness of the fees and (2) failed to limit the award to those fees resulting from the sanctionable conduct.

  4. McDuffie v. Ocmulgee EMC

    338 Ga. App. 200 (Ga. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 2 times
    In McDuffie v. Ocmulgee EMC, 338 Ga.App. 200, 789 S.E.2d 415 (2016), this Court (1) affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's finding that Ocmulgee EMC ("EMC") met its burden of demonstrating that Kasabian McDuffie had returned to his pre-2009-injury condition when EMC suspended McDuffie's indemnity benefits; but (2) remanded this case for factual findings regarding whether EMC had shown that suitable work was available to McDuffie before terminating his benefits.

    As the majority holds, we must construe the evidence in the light most favorable to the party prevailing before the appellate division. Evergreen Packaging v. Prather , 318 Ga.App. 440, 443, 734 S.E.2d 209 (2012). “Nevertheless, we review de novo erroneous applications of law to undisputed facts, as well as decisions based on erroneous theories of law.”

  5. Bodiford v. State

    328 Ga. App. 258 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 16 times
    Explaining that "the free air sniff occurred as a result of [officer’s] decision to expand the traffic stop beyond its original purpose and it therefore cannot serve as a basis for [defendant’s] continued detention"

    We note that in Weems, this Court reversed this same trial court judge after he denied a motion to suppress involving this same officer. These similarities not withstanding, we take this opportunity to reiterate that “[a] unanimous decision by a three-judge panel of this Court remains binding precedent until such time as it is modified or reversed by this Court en banc or our Supreme Court.” Evergreen Packaging v. Prather, 318 Ga.App. 440, 445, n. 15, 734 S.E.2d 209 (2012). Alternatively, Bodiford argues that Hart extended the traffic stop by failing to pursue immediately and diligently the available means of investigation so as to complete quickly his investigation of the traffic violation that precipitated the stop.

  6. Sanchez v. Carter

    343 Ga. App. 187 (Ga. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 4 times

    (Punctuation and citation omitted.) Evergreen Packaging, Inc. v. Prather, 318 Ga. App. 440, 443, 734 S.E.2d 209 (2012). The record shows that, following a hearing to determine Sanchez's entitlement to workers' compensation dependency benefits, the administrative law judge ("ALJ") found the following.

  7. Reid v. Metro. Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth.

    323 Ga. App. 523 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 4 times
    In Reid v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, 323 Ga.App. 523, 746 S.E.2d 779 (2013), this Court reversed the trial court's ruling, finding that Reid's claim did not result from a change in condition and that therefore the claim was not time-barred. The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed that decision in Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth. v. Reid, 295 Ga. 863, 763 S.E.2d 695 (2014).

    Thus, by its terms, this statute applies to changes that occur subsequent to the original claim but which nevertheless result from the same accident that resulted in that claim. See, e.g., Evergreen Packaging v. Prather, 318 Ga.App. 440, 443, 734 S.E.2d 209 (2012); Jones County Bd. of Educ. v. Patterson, 255 Ga.App. 166, 168, 564 S.E.2d 777 (2002). And in applying this language, we have held that a change in condition is shown by evidence of a change in the actual physical condition of the employee (for better or worse).