In a recent article published in Public Now, Shannan Oliver, counsel with Bloom Parham, was mentioned for her recent election to March of Dimes’ Atlanta board. The nonprofit’s mission is to improve the health of mothers and babies by preventing birth defects, premature birth and infant mortality. For the full announcement, you may click here.
Defended appeal of trial court’s grant of summary judgment and $45,000 of attorneys’ fees to Bloom Sugarman. Trial court property granted summary judgment in favor of Bloom Sugarman’s client on claims related to the rezoning of an adjacent property. Trial court subsequently awarded attorneys’ fees and costs in favor of client. The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling.
Successfully obtained a reversal of summary judgment in favor of opposing party. The trial court improperly granted summary judgment to opposing party in nuisance and trespass actions after concluding that there was no evidence of causation. On appeal, Bloom Sugarman argued that the trial court misapplied the law and ignored disputed evidence of causation. The Georgia Court of Appeals agreed and reversed the trial court’s ruling. The Georgia Supreme Court denied certiorari.
Obtained an award of attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of $45,000 for client forced to defend suit. After prevailing on all counts at summary judgment, Bloom Sugarman moved on the client’s behalf for an award of fees and costs under Georgia’s frivolous litigation statute. Plaintiffs argued that their claims were substantially justified and supported by justiciable issues of facts. In the alternative, Plaintiffs argued that they relied upon a novel position supported by existing law. After briefing and hearings on both the merits of the motion and the reasonableness of fees, Judge Vinson agreed with Bloom Sugarman and awarded our client more than half of the attorneys’ fees incurred in the case.
Successfully obtained summary judgment in client’s favor in a suit by a neighboring landowner seeking to enforce a restrictive covenant. The neighbor—who had not been an original party to the restrictive covenant at issue—sought to enforce an interpretation of the covenant that would have substantially impacted the value of multiple lots in client’s residential development. The Court agreed with Bloom Sugarman’s arguments showing why the neighbor’s interpretation was incorrect as a matter of law under the recorded document, leaving only our client’s claim for attorneys’ fees pending in the case. The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order in our client’s favor.
Successfully defended a developer in a suit attempting to invalidate a recent rezoning decision and to enjoin developer from progressing further in development plan until developer constructed certain improvements. After identifying significant evidentiary weaknesses in plaintiff’s case, Bloom Sugarman moved for and obtained summary judgment on the grounds that the plaintiffs were ineligible as a matter of law to bring the claims at issue, allowing developer to continue project and county to continue issuing permits. Bloom Sugarman successfully defended the case through the appellate process, convincing the Georgia Supreme Court that no discretionary appeal was warranted.