Stevens v. Board of Regents

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Stevens v. Board of Regents

199 S.E.2d 620, 129 Ga. App. 347, 1973 Ga. App. LEXIS 999

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 14, 1973

Docket48179

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 199 S.E.2d 620 (Stevens v. Board of Regents) 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

Stevens v. Board of Regents, 199 S.E.2d 620, 129 Ga. App. 347, 1973 Ga. App. LEXIS 999 (Ga. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Stolz, Judge.

In this contract action for damages brought by a professor previously employed at Georgia State College (now University) by the defendant Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, the essential element of the existence of the employment contract could be proved only by establishing that the plaintiff was not properly notified in 1968 that he would not receive a contract for the next academic year. This identical issue having been adjudicated by these parties in Fulton Superior Court, the former adjudication, unreversed, is binding, and the doctrine of estoppel by judgment precluded subsequent litigation of that issue. Shaw v. Miller, 215 Ga. 413, 414 (110 SE2d 759) and cits.

This result is not changed by the fact that the former adjudication was not upon the same cause of action (Smith v. Wood, 115 Ga. App. 265 (1) (154 SE2d 646)), or by the fact that the former adjudication was on appeal from an administrative decision. Although the Administrative Procedure Act (Code Ann. § 3A-120 (h); Ga. L. 1964, pp. 338, 354) provides, "The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the agency as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact” (emphasis supplied), subsections (1) through (6) thereunder clearly authorize appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the agency’s decision on questions of law, which is what was involved in the former adjudication of this case.

Therefore, the trial judge did not err in granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

Eberhardt, P. J., and Pannell, J., concur.

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

Stolz, Judge.

In this contract action for damages brought by a professor previously employed at Georgia State College (now University) by the defendant Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, the essential element of the existence of the employment contract could be proved only by establishing that the plaintiff was not properly notified in 1968 that he would not receive a contract for the next academic year. This identical issue having been adjudicated by these parties in Fulton Superior Court, the former adjudication, unreversed, is binding, and the doctrine of estoppel by judgment precluded subsequent litigation of that issue. Shaw v. Miller, 215 Ga. 413, 414 (110 SE2d 759) and cits.

This result is not changed by the fact that the former adjudication was not upon the same cause of action (Smith v. Wood, 115 Ga. App. 265 (1) (154 SE2d 646)), or by the fact that the former adjudication was on appeal from an administrative decision. Although the Administrative Procedure Act (Code Ann. § 3A-120 (h); Ga. L. 1964, pp. 338, 354) provides, "The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the agency as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact” (emphasis supplied), subsections (1) through (6) thereunder clearly authorize appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the agency’s decision on questions of law, which is what was involved in the former adjudication of this case.

Therefore, the trial judge did not err in granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

Eberhardt, P. J., and Pannell, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 S.E.2d 620, 129 Ga. App. 347, 1973 Ga. App. LEXIS 999, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevens-v-board-of-regents-gactapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack