justice Tag Archives - Atlanta Injury Lawyer Blog

Who Will Be Democracy’s Heroes? Who Will Save The Rule of Law? Trial Judges? Lawyers? Citizens?

September 4, 2025 | Robin Frazer Clark

Who Will Be Democracy’s Heroes? Who Will Save the Rule of Law? Trial Judges? Lawyers? Citizens?

We are in a Constitutional Crisis. The current Administration has no respect for the Rule of Law and takes actions on a daily basis that are specifically directed to undermine our American Democracy. Even the Attorney General, Pam Bondi, a lawyer, who once upon a time (supposedly) swore to uphold the Constitution, engages in absolute lawlessness, blatantly ignoring Court Orders, which is not only undermining our Democracy but is eroding it daily. As a lawyer who took the same oath, what I am seeing on a daily basis is disheartening, frightening, shocking and scary. Every day I ask: What can we do to stop it? I also have found myself asking: Who will be the Heroes? Who will be the Heroes of Democracy who will, in the end, be the ones who can honestly say their actions saved our Country? Will it be the judges? Will it be lawyers? Will it be ordinary citizens?

Trial Judges-

Jerrod Heath’s Acceptance Speech for the 2025 GTLA Courageous Pursuit of Justice Award

August 26, 2025 | Robin Frazer Clark

This is my client, Jerrod Heath, who received the GTLA 2025 Courageous Pursuit of Justice Award. Out of the many deserving people who courageously pursue Justice on behalf of their loved ones here in Georgia, it was an honor of a lifetime for Jerrod (rightfully) to receive this award. Here is a little bit more about this award:

GTLA COURAGEOUS PURSUIT OF JUSTICE AWARD (aka Nestlehutt Award)

GTLA presents this award to the client of a GTLA member during the Annual Convention each year. Our goal is to recognize a client whose pursuit of justice helped the greater good. It’s not about the size of the verdict, or even a victory. It’s about courage the client showed against great odds and powerful opponents.

Robin Frazer Clark’s Client Jerrod Heath Wins the GTLA 2025 Courageous Pursuit of Justice Award

August 22, 2025 | Robin Frazer Clark

I was so proud to nominate my client, Jerrod Heath, for the GTLA 2025 Courageous Pursuit of Justice Award and so overjoyed when it was announced he had won! Out of the many deserving people who courageously pursue Justice on behalf of their loved ones here in Georgia, it was an honor of a lifetime for Jerrod (rightfully) to receive this award. Here is a little bit more about this award:

GTLA COURAGEOUS PURSUIT OF JUSTICE AWARD (aka Nestlehutt Award)

GTLA presents this award to the client of a GTLA member during the Annual Convention each year. Our goal is to recognize a client whose pursuit of justice helped the greater good. It’s not about the size of the verdict, or even a victory. It’s about courage the client showed against great odds and powerful opponents.

Robin Frazer Clark Inducted as Fellow of International Academy of Trial Lawyers

August 1, 2025 | Robin Frazer Clark

Evoto

Robin Frazer Clark Inducted as Fellow of International Academy of Trial Lawyers

Robin Frazer Clark was inducted as a Fellow into the International Academy of Trial Lawyers at the organization’s 2025 Mid-Year Meeting in Vancouver, British Columbia, July 23-27.

My Client’s Presidential Pardon Achieved Seven Years Before President Biden’s Sweeping Pardons

July 2, 2024 | Robin Frazer Clark

I was very happy to hear that President Biden has decided to right historical wrongs by pardoning any U.S. veterans who were convicted for being gay while serving in our U.S. Armed Forces. It is well past time for our country to acknowledge this wrong and the damage it did to so many gay veterans. As President Biden stated: “Today, I am righting an historic wrong by using my clemency authority to pardon many former service members who were convicted simply for being themselves,” Biden said in a statement. “We have a sacred obligation to all of our service members –- including our brave LGBTQI+ service members: to properly prepare and equip them when they are sent into harm’s way, and to care for them and their families when they return home. Today we are making progress in that pursuit.” About time, is all I can say.

I find this very interesting given my experience in securing a Presidential Pardon for a client who had been convicted of having a homosexual relationship while he was serving as an Officer in the U.S. Army. He served a year and a half in Ft. Leavenworth Prison for being gay. I worked for this client for 6 years pro bono, partly because my innate sense of Justice drove me to do so, partly because I have been fighting for equality for gay people for the last 40 years or so, and partly because I could not let this injustice to this client go on and be able to look my two children in the eyes. Both of my kids, who were in college at the time, could not believe that our Government, with its vasts resources, would use those resources to prosecute and convict a U.S. Veteran of simply being who he was. It was simply unfathomable to them and to me. But it really happened. So I set out on a 6 year journey and struggle to obtain a Presidential Pardon for him. Since being gay in the U.S. Army was a Federal offense, only a Presidential Pardon would do. He had been convicted on July 17, 1989, which means he endured 28 years of having the conviction and a dishonorable discharge on his record. This resulted in his being unable to obtain a home mortgage, being limited in potential jobs he would be hired for, being unable to vote, just as some examples of the impact on his life this had.

I will never forget that telephone call on January 17, 2017 from the Department of Justice Pardon Attorney, informing me that President Obama would be granting my client a pardon. What an unbelievable moment! Probably my greatest achievement as a lawyer. And then to call my client and hear his elation on the phone was an incredible moment.

High Time for Georgia’s Antiquated, Outdated “Impact Rule” To Be Scrapped

July 24, 2023 | Robin Frazer Clark

A recent opinion by the The Georgia Court of Appeals, our Intermediate Appellate Court in Georgia, regarding Georgia’s obsolete “impact rule” certainly caused an impact, and not a good one. In Holt v. Rickman, A23A0612, 2023 WL 3858619 (Ga. Ct. App. June 7, 2023) an apartment guest brought action against owners and manager of apartment complex, asserting claims for premises liability and negligent hiring, retention, and supervision after she awakened to discover maintenance worker in her bed.

The facts of Holt are startling, to say the least. A guest of a resident staying in one of the apartments woke up to find an intruder lying next to her on top of the covers on the bed. The intruder was actually a maintenance employee of the apartment complex. He pulled the covers down saying he wanted to “see what she looked like under there.” As he did so, he touched the top of her head. The woman pretended to reach for a weapon and that caused the intruder to flee. As you can imagine, this bizarre incident had to have been frightening. During litigation it was discovered that the apartment complex hired the intruder/maintenance employee in 2016 despite a background check showing he had two pending child molestation charges. He had pled guilty to lesser charges of sexual battery against a child under the age of 16. He was on the Georgia Sexual Offender Registry. The Defendant, with this knowledge in hand, continued to employ him as a maintenance worker with access to a master key, which led to his ability to break into the apartment and to attempt to sexually assault the plaintiff.

The Georgia Court of Appeals held that Georgia’s antiquated “impact rule” applied to the situation and affirmed the grant of summary judgment to the apartment complex. Case dismissed. The “impact rule” is not state-of-the-art science about how an event can affect someone emotionally or psychologically. In fact, it was created in 1892, when there was very little understanding, if any, of psychological trauma. The “impact rule” says that when a person suffers no physical injury as a result of the incident that forms the basis of the claim, there is no recovery for emotional distress. Georgia’s “impact rule” provides that “[i]n a claim concerning negligent conduct, a recovery for emotional distress is allowed only where there is some impact on the plaintiff, and that impact must be a physical injury.” Ryckeley v. Callaway, 261 Ga. 828, 828, 412 S.E.2d 826 (1992). To satisfy the rule, a plaintiff must show that she (1) suffered a physical impact that (2) resulted in a physical injury which (3) caused her mental suffering or emotional distress. Lee v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 272 Ga. 583, 586 (I), 533 S.E.2d 82 (2000). A plaintiff’s failure to meet any one of the three requirements of the impact rule bars recovery even in cases “in which the circumstances portend a claim of emotional distress.” Id.

Know the Truth About Personal Injury Lawyers Before Hiring One: You Need An Actual Georgia Trial Lawyer

October 3, 2022 | Robin Frazer Clark

Lately, I am seeing more and more advertisements, on T.V., on Youtube, on Court TV, on Instagram, on Tik Tok, essentially on every Internet Platform you can think of, of lawyers who tout their legal acumen and ability to get an injured person a lot of money with very little effort. Some of these advertisements have fake clients in them who look perfectly normal, healthy and uninjured, claiming their attorney got them a check for $350,000.00 or some high dollar amount “just like that” with “one call.” Some of these advertisements brag about their lawyers being “trial lawyers” when they actually haven’t even tried very many cases, if any. Some of these advertising lawyers claim to be “elite” (they actually use that word) and yet haven’t even tried 10 cases. Some of these advertisements actually mislead the injured consumer with false statements about what the law and ethical rules allow. Some of these advertisements brag that their lawyers have secured more money in verdicts than any other firm in the “universe” or the “metaverse,” and yet aren’t even licensed to practice law in the State of Georgia. Some of these advertising lawyers brag about obtaining a verdict but upon closer inspection, it was a bench trial, decided by a judge, with no opposition. Things that make you go hmmm…. As a Georgia trial lawyer with over 34 years of experience, I am really just plain sick of it.

I want to help the person who has been injured as a result of someone else’s or some entity’s negligence who is looking for a bona fide Georgia Trial Lawyer to represent them with their case, all the way through trial and appeal if necessary. These are things you should know when hiring a trial lawyer.

Is the attorney actually licensed to practice law in the State of Georgia? Any member of the public can find this out very easily, thanks to the State Bar of Georgia. Simply go to the State Bar’s website, gabar.org, and on the right side you will see a “Member Directory” where you can search for the person’s name. It will tell you if that person is a member of the State Bar of Georgia, where the person went to law school, and when the person first started practicing law in Georgia. This member search on gabar.org will also tell you whether the lawyer has been subject to any public discipline. This tells the consumer how much experience the lawyer has with the law of Georgia. Do you really want to entrust your case to someone who has been a lawyer for only two years? If you are looking at a law firm’s website, you should search every member of the firm here. If only one out of the entire firm is actually licensed to practice law in Georgia, that should tell you how little experience that one Georgia lawyer, in all likelihood, actually has in Georgia law and especially Georgia trial law. Stay away.

When Our Justice System Fails~A Georgia Story of Injustice

February 17, 2020 | Robin Frazer Clark

I was struck this week with an opinion of the Georgia Court of Appeals in what is probably a very rare scenario: where the defendant has already served his entire sentence but the Court exercises jurisdiction to hear the appeal anyway. I would be curious to know how often that happens. My guess is almost never. So the scenario grabbed my attention since it is probably so rare. And you might be asking “What’s the point?” if the defendant is already out of prison anyway. Well, the Court answers “what’s the point” succinctly by saying Justice is the point. Justice is the point.

The case I am talking about is Denson v. State, A19A2307, 2020 WL 255433 (Ga. Ct. App. Jan. 17, 2020), authored by Judge Yvette Miller and concurred by Judge Rickman and Judge Reese. I commend it to your reading. It is a doozy. In this criminal appeal, the trial court did not hear the convicted defendant’s motion for new trial (that had ben timely filed in 2007) until 9 years after it had been filed, and the Georgia Court of Appeals did not resolve the defendant’s direct appeal until 13 years after the original conviction of defendant and after the defendant had served his entire sentence. Wait. What?

That’s right. And the Georgia Court of Appeals made it clear it would ignore the mootness of the their review, since the Defendant had already served his unjustly imposed sentence, to issue a warning to Georgia trial courts of the grave injusctice they may be doing to otherwise innocent criminal defendants. Whew. Like I said, it’s a doozy.

What’s Wrong with Having a 13th Juror? Anything?

November 22, 2019 | Robin Frazer Clark

Image result for trial judge
Recently, there have been a couple of criminal cases heard by the Georgia Supreme Court which have involved the trial judge’s inherent duty to be the final arbiter of fairness and justice in the courtroom. Sometime this is referred to as the “13th Juror,” because the trial judge sometimes must base her or his ultimate decision on the facts, testimony and documentary evidence presented at trial…things an appellate court would not be in a position to know. A recent discussion about the notion of the trial judge as 13th juror came in an appeal of a criminal case, State v. Hamilton, 832 S.E.2d 836 (Ga. Sup. Ct. September 3, 2019) in which the Georgia Supreme Court heard oral argument on the issue of whether the trial judge was authorized to toss out three counts of assault when that the jury had convicted the defendant on, in the judge’s opinion, there was no way factually or legally for those three counts to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The Court affirmed the trial court’s granting of a new trial. “Having reviewed the entire record, and considering that the trial court was authorized, as the thirteenth juror, to discount Taylor’s and Hewatt’s testimony and to credit Hamilton’s story, and bearing in mind the standard of review set forth in OCGA § 5-5-50, we cannot say that the trial court’s conclusion was an abuse of its substantial discretion to grant Hamilton a new trial. See Hamilton, 299 Ga. at 670-671, 791 S.E.2d 51 (“An appellate court will not disturb the first grant of a new trial based on the general grounds unless the trial court abused its discretion in granting it and the law and the facts demand the verdict rendered.”).”

In another case recently argued before the Georgia Supreme Court, the Court told the Fulton County D.A., who was appealing a trial judge’s granting of a new trial, that the D.A. was “wasting the Court’s time” with such an appeal when the trial judge clearly has the power, right and, arguably, the duty, to grant a new trial. In that case, State v. Beard, NO. S19A0535 (Ga. Sup. Ct. October 31, 2019) quoted below, the Supreme Court’s opinion called the D.A.’s position “bizarre.” “Contrary to the State’s bizarre argument, the jury’s verdict was not demanded by the “great physical laws of the universe.” (“An appellate court will not disturb the first grant of a new trial based on the general grounds unless the trial court abused its discretion in granting it and the law and the facts demand the verdict rendered.”).’

State v. Beard, S19A0535, 2019 WL 5656338, at 4 (Ga. Oct. 31, 2019). Since then, the Fulton County D.A. dismissed its appeal and has vowed to take his argument to the Georgia Legislature in an attempt to get legislation passed that will eliminate this inherent duty and power of the trial judge.