Court Opinion

ID: 9575415
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:13:35.145597+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:48:10.467639
License: Public Domain

Pope, Judge,
concurring specially.
In my view, appellee’s failure to comply with the contract provisions requiring (1) that hé keep the Community Development Director knowledgeable of his whereabouts and (2) that he attend necessary meetings would constitute material breaches of the contract. Proof of same would authorize the City to terminate the contract without incurring any liability to appellee under the ninety-day notice provision. However, in response to appellee’s prima facie case, the City offers nothing more than vague and conclusory allegations of appellee’s alleged contract noncompliance, rather than specific adverse facts. See Hyman v. Horwitz, 148 Ga. App. 647, 649 (252 SE2d 74) (1979). Under these circumstances, the trial court properly granted appellee’s motion for summary judgment.
*438Alice D. Bonner, for appellee.