Law v. Biolab, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• “For a statement to be admissible under OCGA § 24-8-801 (d) (2) (C) or (D), the subject matter of the statement must relate to what the employee would know because of the employee’s job duties”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Family Thrift, Inc. v. Cheryl Birthrong
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2016-03-11· cited 10×
• Emory Healthcare, Inc. v. Pardue
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2014-07-31· cited 2×

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Cowart v. Widener
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2010-07-12· cited 430×
• Hospital Authority v. Eason
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1966-09-08· cited 30×
• Ellis v. Sears Roebuck & Co.
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1989-12-04· cited 24×
• Persinger v. Step by Step Infant Development Center
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2002-02-15· cited 17×
• Watts & Colwell Builders, Inc. v. Martin
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2011-11-29· cited 14×
• Evans v. Heard
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1994-05-16· cited 12×
• Doyle v. RST Construction Specialty, Inc.
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2007-06-21· cited 4×
• Lodge v. Champion Home Builders Co.
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1984-01-31· cited 4×
• Noble v. Nieznany
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1999-08-09· cited 3×