Vareika v. Rhine

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Vareika v. Rhine

653 S.E.2d 485, 288 Ga. App. 15, 2007 Fulton County D. Rep. 2961, 2007 Ga. App. LEXIS 1034

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 20, 2007

DocketA07A1700

StatusPublished

This text of 653 S.E.2d 485 (Vareika v. Rhine) 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

Vareika v. Rhine, 653 S.E.2d 485, 288 Ga. App. 15, 2007 Fulton County D. Rep. 2961, 2007 Ga. App. LEXIS 1034 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Bernes, Judge.

This case arises from the sale of a residence that was allegedly riddled with defects. Jodi L. and Vido J. Vareika appeal from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to appellees Todd R. and Amy B. Rhine and L. Robert Benjamin. They also challenge the trial court’s order denying their motion to add additional defendants. Because appellants failed to include any argument or citation of authority in support of the 41 allegations of error submitted to this Court, we affirm. Austin v. Cohen, 251 Ga. App. 548 (554 SE2d 312) (2001). In their brief, appellants asserted that argument and citation of authority was “omitted due to page limitation.” Appellants, however, made no request for additional pages pursuant to Court of Appeals Rule 24 (Si-

Judgment affirmed.

Blackburn, P. J., and Ruffin, J., concur. [16]*16Decided September 20, 2007 Reconsideration denied October 24,2007. Regina T. Stamps, Tom Pye, for appellants. Burr & Forman, Kwende B. Jones, Gregory F. Harley, Goodman, McDuffey, Lindsey & Johnson, James F. Cook, Jr., Boyd & Greene, Victoria L. Helms, for appellees.

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

Bernes, Judge.

This case arises from the sale of a residence that was allegedly riddled with defects. Jodi L. and Vido J. Vareika appeal from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to appellees Todd R. and Amy B. Rhine and L. Robert Benjamin. They also challenge the trial court’s order denying their motion to add additional defendants. Because appellants failed to include any argument or citation of authority in support of the 41 allegations of error submitted to this Court, we affirm. Austin v. Cohen, 251 Ga. App. 548 (554 SE2d 312) (2001). In their brief, appellants asserted that argument and citation of authority was “omitted due to page limitation.” Appellants, however, made no request for additional pages pursuant to Court of Appeals Rule 24 (Si-

Judgment affirmed.

Blackburn, P. J., and Ruffin, J., concur. [16]*16Decided September 20, 2007 Reconsideration denied October 24,2007. Regina T. Stamps, Tom Pye, for appellants. Burr & Forman, Kwende B. Jones, Gregory F. Harley, Goodman, McDuffey, Lindsey & Johnson, James F. Cook, Jr., Boyd & Greene, Victoria L. Helms, for appellees.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

653 S.E.2d 485, 288 Ga. App. 15, 2007 Fulton County D. Rep. 2961, 2007 Ga. App. LEXIS 1034, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vareika-v-rhine-gactapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack