§Why CasetextPricing

Apex Bank v. Ameris Bank, Inc.

REPLY BRIEF re Second MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

9 Cited authorities

  1. Home Depot Usa., Inc. v. Wabash Nat'l Corp.

    314 Ga. App. 360 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012)   Cited 50 times
    Holding that where underlying claims failed, additional claims for punitive damages and attorney's fees must also fail as a matter of law

  2. Holloman v. D.R. Horton, Inc.

    241 Ga. App. 141 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 65 times
    Holding that prayer for relief is not an allegation in the complaint requiring an answer

  3. General Electric Co. v. Lowe's Home Centers

    279 Ga. 77 (Ga. 2005)   Cited 54 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the economic loss rule "avoids the unfairness to defendants that would come with duplicative liability for the same damage."

  4. Arriaga-Zacarias v. Lewis Taylor Farms, Inc.

    Civil Action No. 7:08-CV-32(HL) (M.D. Ga. Oct. 10, 2008)   Cited 36 times

    Civil Action No. 7:08-CV-32(HL). October 10, 2008 ORDER HUGH LAWSON, District Judge Before the Court is Defendants' Motion to Stay Discovery (Doc. 33) and Plaintiffs' Motion for a Partial Stay of Discovery (Doc. 34). For the following reasons, Defendants' Motion is granted and Plaintiffs' Motion is denied as moot. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs are Mexican citizens who were employed by Defendants as farm workers during various time periods in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007. Defendants obtained

  5. Hanover Insurance v. Hermosa Construction Group, LLC

    57 F. Supp. 3d 1389 (N.D. Ga. 2014)   Cited 20 times
    Holding that claims based on an independent duty not to interfere with another's business are outside the contractual relationship and not barred by the economic loss doctrine

  6. City of Cairo v. Hightower Consulting Eng'rs, Inc.

    278 Ga. App. 721 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 20 times
    Concluding that the misrepresentation exception to the economic loss rule applied because the plaintiff had asserted a clam for negligent misrepresentation

  7. Walzer v. Muriel Siebert & Co.

    447 F. App'x 377 (3d Cir. 2011)   Cited 12 times

    No. 10-4526 10-06-2011 ANDREW WALZER, Appellant v. MURIEL SIEBERT & CO.; NATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC; GERARD KOSKE; RONALD BONO; MURIEL SIEBERT PER CURIAM NOT PRECEDENTIAL On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civil Action No. 04-cv-05672) District Judge: Honorable Dickinson R. Debevoise Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) September 27, 2011 Before: SCIRICA, SMITH and VANASKIE, Circuit Judges OPINION PER CURIAM Andrew Walzer appeals pro

  8. Helpling v. Rheem Mfg. Co.

    1:15-cv-2247-WSD (N.D. Ga. Mar. 23, 2016)   Cited 4 times

    1:15-cv-2247-WSD 03-23-2016 MICHAEL HELPLING, RYAN DIEDRICH, and JEFFREY TAYLOR, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. RHEEM MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Defendant. WILLIAM S. DUFFEY, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendant Rheem Manufacturing Company's ("Rheem") Motion to Dismiss Class Action Complaint [14] ("Motion to Dismiss"). Also before the Court is Plaintiffs Michael Helpling, Ryan Diedrich, and Jeffrey Taylor's

  9. NAM v. U.S. XPRESS, INC.

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10-CV-3924-AT (N.D. Ga. Mar. 25, 2011)

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10-CV-3924-AT. March 25, 2011 ORDER AMY TOTENBERG, District Judge This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Stay Rule 26 Rule 26 Proceedings and all Discovery Pending Rulings on Motion to Transfer Venue and Motion to Dismiss. [Doc. 10]. The motion is hereby GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART for the reasons set forth below. I. Background Plaintiffs filed their Complaint in the State Court of Gwinnett County on November 3, 2010. According to Plaintiffs, Defendants