Kelly v. Harris

3 Citing cases

  1. Premier Eye Assocs., P.C. v. Mag Mut. Ins. Co.

    355 Ga. App. 620 (Ga. Ct. App. 2020)   Cited 8 times

    McCaskill v. Carillo , 263 Ga. App. 890, 890, 589 S.E.2d 582 (2003).Kelly v. Harris , 329 Ga. App. 752, 753, 766 S.E.2d 146 (2014) (punctuation omitted).Id. (punctuation omitted).

  2. Yash Sols., LLC v. N.Y. Glob. Consultants Corp.

    352 Ga. App. 127 (Ga. Ct. App. 2019)   Cited 21 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting principles that "[m]ere conclusory statements are not the type of meaningful argument contemplated by our rules" and that "cogent legal analysis … is, at a minimum, a discussion of the appropriate law as applied to the relevant facts"

    McCaskill v. Carillo , 263 Ga. App. 890, 890, 589 S.E.2d 582 (2003).Kelly v. Harris , 329 Ga. App. 752, 753, 766 S.E.2d 146 (2014) (punctuation omitted).Id. (punctuation omitted).

  3. Callaway v. Willard

    351 Ga. App. 1 (Ga. Ct. App. 2019)   Cited 7 times

    Indeed, there is nothing in the record or the parties’ briefs to suggest that—at least as of the 2018 order that is the subject of this appeal—he ever made such distributions.See, e.g. , Kelly v. Harris , 329 Ga. App. 752, 752, 766 S.E.2d 146 (2014). The remaining evidence necessary to resolve this appeal, viewed in the light most favorable to Callaway, is set forth infra in the relevant divisions.