Hatcher v. FAMILY DOLLAR STORES OF GEORGIA, INC.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hatcher v. FAMILY DOLLAR STORES OF GEORGIA, INC.

633 S.E.2d 568, 280 Ga. App. 191, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 1976, 2006 Ga. App. LEXIS 713

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 16, 2006

DocketA06A0009

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 633 S.E.2d 568 (Hatcher v. FAMILY DOLLAR STORES OF GEORGIA, INC.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hatcher v. FAMILY DOLLAR STORES OF GEORGIA, INC., 633 S.E.2d 568, 280 Ga. App. 191, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 1976, 2006 Ga. App. LEXIS 713 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Smith, Presiding Judge.

In this premises liability case, Susanne and Willie Hatcher appeal from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Family Dollar Stores of Georgia, Inc. and Garrett’s Red and White, Inc. We affirm because the Hatchers failed to provide this court with a transcript necessary to review the propriety of the trial court’s order.

The trial court’s order granting summary judgment to the defendants stated that it did so, in part, based upon “evidence having been presented by all parties. . . .” All of the parties acknowledge in their briefs before this court that a hearing was held on the motion for summary judgment, and appellants’ notice of appeal stated, “[a] *192 transcript of the evidence will not be filed.” Without this transcript, “we cannot determine whether evidentiary submissions, stipulations, or statements in place by counsel were tendered at the hearing.” Burt Dev. Co. v. Lee County Tax Assessors, 240 Ga. App. 451, 452 (1) (523 SE2d 81) (1999). Therefore, “we must presume that the trial court’s findings are supported by competent evidence and that the court applied the appropriate standard in granting summary judgment.” Id.

Decided June 16, 2006 — Reconsideration denied June 29, 2006. Reynolds & McArthur, W. Carl Reynolds, Katherine L. McArthur, Bradley J. Survant, for appellants. Fulcher, Flagler, Reed, Hanks & Harper, James W. Purcell, Michael N. Loebl, Martin Snow, Lisa M. Edwards, for appellees.

We further note that affidavits filed by appellants in the record before us do not include the exhibit mentioned by the affiants, which is a photograph of the location where Mrs. Hatcher and another person fell. This photograph might have been submitted for the trial court’s review during the summary judgment hearing, and its absence from the record provides further support for our conclusion that we must affirm the trial court.

Judgment affirmed.

Ruffin, C. J., and Phipps, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Smith, Presiding Judge.

In this premises liability case, Susanne and Willie Hatcher appeal from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Family Dollar Stores of Georgia, Inc. and Garrett’s Red and White, Inc. We affirm because the Hatchers failed to provide this court with a transcript necessary to review the propriety of the trial court’s order.

The trial court’s order granting summary judgment to the defendants stated that it did so, in part, based upon “evidence having been presented by all parties. . . .” All of the parties acknowledge in their briefs before this court that a hearing was held on the motion for summary judgment, and appellants’ notice of appeal stated, “[a] *192 transcript of the evidence will not be filed.” Without this transcript, “we cannot determine whether evidentiary submissions, stipulations, or statements in place by counsel were tendered at the hearing.” Burt Dev. Co. v. Lee County Tax Assessors, 240 Ga. App. 451, 452 (1) (523 SE2d 81) (1999). Therefore, “we must presume that the trial court’s findings are supported by competent evidence and that the court applied the appropriate standard in granting summary judgment.” Id.

Decided June 16, 2006 — Reconsideration denied June 29, 2006. Reynolds & McArthur, W. Carl Reynolds, Katherine L. McArthur, Bradley J. Survant, for appellants. Fulcher, Flagler, Reed, Hanks & Harper, James W. Purcell, Michael N. Loebl, Martin Snow, Lisa M. Edwards, for appellees.

We further note that affidavits filed by appellants in the record before us do not include the exhibit mentioned by the affiants, which is a photograph of the location where Mrs. Hatcher and another person fell. This photograph might have been submitted for the trial court’s review during the summary judgment hearing, and its absence from the record provides further support for our conclusion that we must affirm the trial court.

Judgment affirmed.

Ruffin, C. J., and Phipps, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

633 S.E.2d 568, 280 Ga. App. 191, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 1976, 2006 Ga. App. LEXIS 713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hatcher-v-family-dollar-stores-of-georgia-inc-gactapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack