Skip to main content
Robert W. Hughes Jr.
Avvo
Pro

Robert Hughes’s Legal Cases

16 total


  • Bailey v. Gwinnett County and Annistown Road Baptist Church, Inc.

    Practice Area:
    Litigation
    Date:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Outcome:
    Judgment for Plaintiff
    Description:
    This case involved the flow of water from the property of Annistown Road Baptist Church and Gwinnett County onto the property of Lelia Bailey. The water severely damaged Ms. Bailey's home. The case was appealed to the Georgia Court of Appeals which partially reversed the trial court and increased the damages that Ms. Bailey was awarded. The Supreme Court of Georgia denied certiorari and would not hear the appeal of Annistown Road Baptist Church. We have collected $143,209.21 for Ms. Bailey.
  • In Re: Estate of Harold Kennedy

    Practice Area:
    Probate
    Date:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Outcome:
    Verdict for Family of Harold Kennedy
    Description:
    The family of Harold Kennedy claimed that he was coerced into executing a new will that was favorable to a caregiver. I represented the Kenneey family and was able to convince the jury that the will was improperly obtained and was the result of undue influence and that Mr. Kennedy did not have the mental capacity to exeute the Will.
  • In Re: Estate of Memphis Azalee Boss

    Practice Area:
    Probate
    Date:
    Oct 01, 2008
    Outcome:
    Verdict for siblings of Memphis Azalee Boss
    Description:
    The siblings of Memphis Azalee Boss maintained that the Last Will of Ms. Boss was procured through the fraud and undue influence of Ann Peevy. The jury found that Ms. Peevy committed fraud against Ms. Boss in causing her to create a will that was favorable to John and Ann Peevy.
  • King v. Manders

    Practice Area:
    Probate
    Date:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Outcome:
    Debts of estate resolved
    Description:
    This case involved a decision concerning whether a mortgage is a debt of an estate when the real estate securing the mortgage passes to a joint tenant. The Georgia Supreme Court held that when a joint tenant gains ownership of property because the other joint tenant passes away, there is no requirement for the estate to pay the outstanding balance of the mortgage; however, if the real estate is sold or foreclosed upon and there is a deficiency remaining after the sale of the property, the estate is responsible for the deficiency. The Supreme Court also clarified the issue of exoneration in Georgia. If the property had passed pursuant to a will, it woudl have been the duty of the estate to pay the mortgage when it transferred the property.
  • Miller et al v. Vortex et al

    Practice Area:
    Business
    Date:
    Jan 07, 2009
    Outcome:
    Verdict on counterclaim
    Description:
    This case was about a business dispute between the parties to a sales agreement. Crookston bought the stock in Vortex from Miller and Gabree. Each party had obligations that were to be performed. Crookston performed his obligations until it became apparent that Miller and Gabree were not going to perform their obligations. Miller and Gabree owned another company, Affeldt Packaging Machinery, LLC that had certian obligations that arose from the conduct of the parties. Judgment for Miller and Gabree for $55,000. Judgment for Crookston and Vortex for about $142,000.
  • Needham v. Mirabal

    Practice Area:
    Probate
    Outcome:
    Verdict for Plaintiff
    Description:
    Beneificary of Estate filed suit against Executor for failure to distribute estate in accordance with the will. After a 1 day hearing, the court ruled that the Executor had failed to distribute the estate in accordance with the will and that her fialure to distribute the will caused the executor to forfeit the executor's fee to which she otherwise was entitled. Needham was also awarded his attorney's fees for bringing the claim.
  • Sargent v. Sargent

    Practice Area:
    Probate
    Date:
    Jul 03, 2010
    Outcome:
    My clients succeeeded
    Description:
    My clients were suing to have an amendment to a trust declared invalid due to the improper execution of the trust. The trial court agreed with my clients and declared the amendment to the trust to be invalid. The Georgia Court of Appeals recently upheld the trial court. The result is that my clients remain as beneficiaries of the trust rather than being excluded completely.
  • Omni Hotels Management Corp. v. Network Communications, Inc.

    Practice Area:
    Business
    Date:
    May 18, 2009
    Outcome:
    NCI prevailed on its motion
    Description:
    Omni Hotels sued my client, NCI, for breach of a contract concerning NCI holding a convention at an Omni Hotel and asked the Court to award it more than $250,000. The contract contained a liquidation clause that specified a certain penalty if NCI cancelled the convention. NCI cancelled the convention and Omni sued seeking its liquidated damages. On a motion by NCI, the trial court struck the liquidated damges clause from the contract. This resulted in Omni having to prove its damges if it wanted to recover. The matter settled for a nominal sum.
  • Main Street Acquisition Corp v. Fister

    Practice Area:
    Debt Collection
    Date:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Outcome:
    Fister won the case
    Description:
    My client was sued by a debt assignment company alleging that she owed a credit card account. My client filed an answer denying that she owed the money and filed a counterclaim for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). My client won by having the lawsuit against her dismissed and by succeeding on her FDCPA claim and was awarded the maximum statutory damages and all of her attorney's fees.
  • Nesbit et al v. Nesbit

    Practice Area:
    Personal Injury
    Date:
    Jul 22, 2011
    Outcome:
    My client, the defendant, won when the Plaintiffs dismissed the lawsuit and had the court awared her all of her attorney's fees.
    Description:
    My client , the Defendant, was sued by her siblings, the Plaintiffs, for allegedly taking property that belonged to their late Mother's estate, for damaging the family home that they purchased and for inflicting emotional distress on them. My client filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and asked the court to rule against her siblings on all claims. Before the court could rule on the claims, the Plaintiff siblings dismissed their lawsuit. Because our firm believed that the Plaintiffs had no basis for the lawsuit, we asked the court to award our client all of her attorney's fees for having to defend a baseless lawsuit. The court agreed and awarded our client, the defendant, all of her attorney's fees.