Brown v. All-Tech Inv. Group, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming the trial court’s grant of summary judgment because “no reasonable jury” could find in the plaintiff’s favor on the issue of proximate cause
• independent, intervening criminal act of third party generally treated as proximate cause of injury superseding any negligence of defendant, unless intervening criminal act is reasonably foreseeable consequence of defendant’s negligence
• invitees, injured in criminal attack on building, were not third-party beneficiaries of contract between premises owner and company providing security to premises, even though invitees could expect to be benefitted by performance of security contract
• experts’ opinions which discussed generalized concepts of violent reactions to financial disaster and workplace violence insufficient to create issue of fact as to foreseeability of shooting spree at the offices of two day-trading firms which killed nine people
• “[S]ummary judgment is appropriate in negligence cases when, viewing all the facts and reasonable inferences from those facts in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, the evidence does not create a triable issue on the question of proximate cause.”
• “To state a cause of action for negligence under Georgia law, the following elements are essential: (1) Alegal duty to conform to a standard of conduct raised by the law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm; (2) a breach of this standard; (3

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).