(Download) "Miller v. Lomax" by The Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia First Division # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Miller v. Lomax
- Author : The Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia First Division
- Release Date : January 04, 2004
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 62 KB
Description
Estelle Lee Miller, Linda J. Miller, and Robert McCready Miller sued Robert R. Lomax as executor of the estate of Thomas Eugene Miller, Carolyn Baldwin Miller, and Ray's Uptown Body Shop, Inc. for fraud and breach of contract. By amendment to their complaint, the Miller plaintiffs added claims against Carolyn Miller and Lomax for interference with contract and against Lomax for breach of fiduciary duty. The trial court granted summary judgment to Lomax, Carolyn Miller, and Ray's. The Miller plaintiffs appeal. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm in part and reverse in part. To prevail on a motion for summary judgment, the moving party must demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact, and that the undisputed facts, viewed in a light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, warrant judgment as a matter of law. OCGA § 9-11-56 (c); Lau's Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491 (405 SE2d 474) (1991). A defendant carries this burden by demonstrating the absence of evidence as to one essential element of the plaintiff's case. Should the defendant do so, the plaintiff ""cannot rest on its pleadings, but rather must point to specific evidence giving rise to a triable issue."" Id. Our review is de novo. Pyle v. City of Cedartown, 240 Ga. App. 445, 446 (524 SE2d 7) (1999).