Spies v. Carpenter

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that OCGA § 9-10-31.1 “could serve to modify the holding in Holtsclaw” where the new statute, rather than OCGA § 19-9-47, was invoked to support a forum non conveniens motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).