Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 263 Ga. 895 - Harrell v. Lusk

Harrell v. Lusk’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
September 2004
most recently cited

12 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Howard v. Walker · 146 Ga. App. 341 - Hughes v. Malone · 63 Ga. App. 451 - Pilgrim v. Landham · 112 Ga. App. 163 - Covil v. Robert & Co. Associates · Housing Auth. of Savannah v. Greene

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A]lthough ordinarily this Court would rule that [plaintiffs' original] complaint, filed with[out] the affidavit of a licensed [exterminator], should be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to OCGA § 9-11-9.1(f), that result would be unfair in this case. As in Lutz v. Foran, 262 Ga. 819 (4) ( 427 SE2d 248 ) (1993), this is an instance in which it was unclear at the time [plaintiffs] filed [their] initial suit [on March 16, 1993,] whether OCGA § 9-11-9.1 applied to claims [the gravamen of which was] malpractice against [exterminators]. Thus, it would be manifestly unfair to apply OCGA § 9-11-9.1(f) to the case at bar. [Cit.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “between those occupations included in Title 43 where licensure involves merely registration ... and those occupations where licensure is conditioned upon the state examining board's determination that the applicant successfully completed the schooling and/or training upon which licensure is statutorily preconditioned.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “that the affidavit requirements of [OCGA] § 9-11-9.1 apply only to those professions recognized under Georgia law in OCGA §§ 14-7-2(2); 14-10-2(2), and 43-1-24[, citing] Justice Weltner's special concurrence to Creel v. Cotton States Mut. Ins. Co., 260 Ga. 499 ( 397 SE2d 294 ) (1990).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.