Dimambro Northend Associates v. Williams

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that award under OCGA § 13-6-11 was not authorized when “[t]here was a bona fide controversy as to causation”
• finding a bona fide controversy to exist where experts on both sides testified to such on the issue of causation
• Where abona fide controversy existed, the evidence did not demand a verdict for either side, and there was no evidence of bad faith, stubborn litigiousness, or unnecessary trouble and expense, an award for attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 was not. supported.
• Where a bona fide controversy existed, the evidence did not demand a verdict for either side, and there was no evidence of bad faith, stubborn litigiousness, or unnecessary trouble and expense, an award for attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 was not supported.
• where a bona fide controversy existed; the evidence did not demand a verdict for either side; and there was no evidence of bad faith, stubborn litigiousness, or unnecessary trouble and expense, an award for attorneys’ fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 was not supported
• although the trial court should have allowed the other party to cross-examine the witness about his qualifications before declaring him an expert, its failure to do so was not prejudicial where it would have been abuse of discretion not to accept the witness as an expert

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).