In prior posts, we have discussed Georgia’s constitutional prohibition against local governments incurring “new debt” without voter approval in the context of public works. A… Read More »Update on Local Governments’ Constitutional New-Debt Limitation
More than three years after Georgia Governor Nathan Deal made it his top transportation project, the planned redevelopment of the I-285/GA 400 interchange in Sandy… Read More »Atlanta Interchange Rebuild Will Use Public-Private Partnership Structure
The Georgia Court of Appeals recently addressed the distinction between professional negligence vis‑à‑vis simple negligence. This distinction was particularly important in Hamilton-King v. HNTB Georgia, Inc., 2011 WL 2716073 (2011) because the trial court previously excluded Plaintiffs’ expert testimony, an essential part of its professional negligence claim. Without the expert testimony, Plaintiffs’ professional negligence claim was doomed. The only remaining question was whether Plaintiffs also asserted claims of simple negligence. Finding that the claims were based solely on professional negligence, the case was properly dismissed.