JAMES TAYLOR v. MOOD RITE, LLC

── JAMES TAYLOR v. MOOD RITE, LLC ── Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia Date: May 15, 2026 Category: General SECOND DIVISION DOYLE, P. J., DAVIS, J., and SENIOR JUDGE FULLER NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.gov/rules May 15, 2026 In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A26A0725. TAYLOR et al. v. MOOD RITE, LLC et al. DAVIS, Judge. In this product liability action involving an herbal supplement known as “kratom,” James and Lori Taylor appeal from the trial court’s orders granting summary judgment to Mood Rite, LLC, Magic Vapor, LLC, Jastinder Thind, and Gurmeet Josan.1 On appeal, the Taylors allege the trial court erred in granting Mood Rite’s motion for summary judgment by (1) finding as a matter of law that Mood Rite 1 The initial complaint named Mood Rite and Cobb Express41, LLC as defendants. Cobb Express41 entered into and satisfied a consent judgment with the Taylors. The Taylors added several additional defendants but later dismissed the complaint against most of them. The remaining defendants in the Taylors’ complaint are Mood Rite, Magic Vapor, Thind, and Josan. After granting Mood Rite and Magic Vapors’ motions for summary judgment, the trial court granted the Taylors’ motion to dismiss Worldwide Manufacturing, LLC as a defendant over Mood Rite’s objection. was not a manufacturer of the kratom products under OCGA § 51-1-11; (2) finding there was no genuine issue of disputed fact that Mood Rite had actual or constructive knowledge of the dangers kratom posed; and (3) finding that the claims against Magic Vapor were dependent on the success of the claims against Mood Rite. We discern no error. Summary judgment is appropriate where there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. OCGA § 9-11-56(c). On appeal from an order granting a motion for summary judgment, we apply a de novo standard of review, and we view the evidence, and all reasonable conclusions and inferences drawn from it, in the light most favorable to the nonmovant. Wadley v. Mother Murphy’s Lab’ys, Inc., 357 Ga. App. 259, 260 (850 SE2d 490) (2020). The nonmoving party “must point to specific evidence giving rise to a triable issue ... even if meager and indefinite, [the evidence] may be sufficient to establish the necessary standard as against a motion for summary judgment since this slight evidence must be considered in the light most favorable to plaintiffs.” Bright v. Sandstone Hospitality, LLC, 327 Ga. App. 157, 157-58 (755 SE2d 899) (2014) (quotation marks omitted). So viewed, the evidence shows the following. 2  Kratom is an herbal substance derived from the leaves of a tropical evergreen tree native to southeast Asia known as Mitragyna speciosa that contains the alkaloid mitragynine. OCGA § 16-13-120(2), (4). OCGA § 16-13-120(3) and (4) define “kratom extract” as a product that has been modified, processed, or otherwise manufactured with a food-grade solvent and “kratom product” as a product containing any part of the leaf of the plant mitragyna. Thind and Josan, a married couple, are the co-owners of Mood Rite and Magic Vapor. Mood Rite was incorporated and began buying and selling kratom in 2020 after Josan met the owner of Worldwide Manufacturing, LLC (“Worldwide”) at a trade show. Mood Rite purchased kratom product from Worldwide, packaged the kratom into bags and plastic containers, and put Mood Rite labeling on the containers. The Mood Rite labeling included a warning that the product was not approved by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and that the FDA considered kratom not to be fit for human consumption. Otherwise, the b