 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Henderson v. Gandy12/1/2005
ot affect anyone outside of that organization. If conduct does not affect anyone outside of a professional organization, then it does not affect a consumer "'and could not affect the consuming public generally.' [Cit.]" Henderson v. Gandy, supra at 829 (4) (quoting Zeeman v. Black, 156 Ga. App. 82-83 (273 SE2d 910) (1980)).
Footnote 3 further provides that, under the majority's holding, "an internal policy which is implemented to deceive the consumer and which further the business or commercial aspects of a physician's practice may be actionable under the FBPA." Of course, such an internal policy would not affect only the internal practices of the professional organization, but could instead affect the consuming public generally. Therefore, the majority's holding and the holding of the Court of Appeals are both right for the same reason. "The FBPA ... does not provide a remedy for actions that do not and could not affect the general consuming public. [Cit.]" Henderson v. Gandy, supra at 830 (4). Accordingly, we should either summarily affirm the Court of Appeals or vacate the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted.
I am authorized to state that Justice Melton joins in this special concurrence.
Page 1 2 3 4 Georgia Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|