Contact
Corporate Square
343-C Dahlonega Street
Cumming, Georgia 30040 law@jstlegal.com (770) 887-4554 (office) 1-888-698-5328 (eFax)
|
Home
|
Georgia Zoning and Land Use |
 |
 |
 |
|
Our firm represents real estate developers and homeowners in issues involving annexations and zoning and land use regulations. Our firm can help to guide clients through the maze of regulations, permitting, and approvals required in order to start a new development or even to remodel your home. Disputes do occur in zoning and land use areas. As a trial lawyer, attorney Stuart Teague prepares each zoning and land use dispute as if it will go to trial. Although most cases are settled before a trial, this approach maximizes our understanding of the issues so that we may negotiate with the best possible strength. For representation in a dispute involving Georgia municipal or county zoning laws, contact our Cumming, Georgia real estate attorney Stuart Teague. |
|
|
Corporate Disputes in Forsyth County, Georgia |
|
|
|
|
All business operates in a legal environment that presents many opportunities for disputes. Also, businesses face legal compliance issues on a daily basis. In addition, business owners, shareholders, partners, managers, and employees often face conflicts with one another, with competitors, and, unfortunately, sometimes even with customers. We handle most types of business, corporate, and partnership disputes. |
|
|
Water Law in Forsyth County |
|
|
|
|
We represent clients in local environmental issues. As land is developed, land disturbances can cause water problems. These problems include erosion, improper drainage, and flooding. If you are experiencing a dispute regarding water run off and drainage problems, contact our law firm. |
|
|
|
Recent Case Regarding Coverage Under Insurance Policies |
Hathaway Development Co., Inc. v. American Empire Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 2009 WL 3807175 (Ga.App., Nov. 16, 2009)
The recent opinion of the Georgia Court of Appeals in Hathaway Development Co., Inc. v. American Empire Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 2009 WL 3807175 (Ga.App., Nov. 16, 2009), is a reminder that anyone seeking to hold an insurance company to its obligations must make sure that the terms of the insurance policy are satisfied. In Hathaway Development Co., supra, a plaintiff contractor obtained a judgment against an insured subcontractor. The contractor then stepped into the shoes of the subcontractor and sued the subcontractor's insurer for coverage under the subcontractor's Commercial General Liability policy. In reversing the decision of the trial court that granted judgment to the insurance company, the Georgia Court of Appeals reemphasized that the plaintiff must comply with the conditions of coverage in the policy regardless of its status as the plaintiff stepping into the shoes of the subcontractor.
The Court also reviewed other rules that provide hints as to how to frame a case for a plaintiff seeking to assert a claim that would be covered under the insured's policy. The Court noted:
[W]hile construction defects constituting a breach of contract are not covered by CGL policies, Gary L. Shaw Builders v. State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co., 182 Ga.App. 220, 355 S.E.2d 130 (1987), negligently performed faulty workmanship that damages other property may constitute an “occurrence” under a CGL policy. SawHorse, Inc. v. Southern Guaranty Ins., 269 Ga.App. 493, 498(2), 604 S.E.2d 541 (2004). “An accident is an unexpected happening rather than one occurring through intention or design. [Cit.]” Custom Planning & Dev. v. American Nat. Fire Ins., 270 Ga.App. 8, 10, 606 S.E.2d 39 (2004). In this case, Hathaway's default judgment was based on its claim of negligence against Whisnant, and American Empire cannot now argue that Hathaway's claim was actually for breach of contract. Cf. Custom Planning & Development, supra, 270 Ga.App. at 10, 606 S.E.2d 39 (arbitrator's award based on breach of contract; thus negligence was excluded as basis for liability); McDonald Construction Co. v. Bituminous Cas. Corp., 279 Ga.App. 757, 762, 632 S.E.2d 420 (2006) (case involved only contract claims, not negligence claims).
Accordingly, a plaintiff seeking to make a claim that will be covered under a policy should be careful and consider theories such as negligence in addition to breach of contract in order to make out a claim of coverage once and if the plaintiff prevails on its claim against the insured defendant. |
|
|
|
