JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court reviewed a trial court's denial of a motion to suppress a confession, where the defendant had initially invoked his right to counsel but later waived it and confessed.
The trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress the confession, as it found the defendant's waiver of his previously invoked right to counsel was knowing and voluntary.
Curtis Brown was arrested and charged with burglary, theft, and criminal mischief. After being read his Miranda rights, he invoked his right to counse…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
PER CURIAM: Appellant Johnson Controls, Inc. brought suit against appellee Safeco Insurance Company of America seeking payment on a surety bond. Because this case involved an unanswered Georgia law issue involving the proper interpretation of O.C.G.A. § 10-7-24 (1989)’s three-month statute of limitations, we certified the question to the Supreme Court of Georgia pursuant to Ga. Const. art. VI, § 6 para. 4; O.C.G.A. § 15-2-9; and Rule 37 of the Supreme Court of Georgia. Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America, 913 F. 2d 907 (11th Cir.1990). The Supreme Court of Georgia has now answered the certified question in the affirmative. Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America, 261 Ga. 364, 404 S.E. 2d 556 (1991). In light of the Supreme Court of Georgia’s opinion, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Safeco. AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Safeco Ins. Co. OF Am., 913 F.2d 907 (11th Cir. 1990)