(“[When] the verdict is reversed [and] the case is remanded for new trial..., [i]f the denial of summary judgment is enumerated as error, OCGA § 5-6-34 (d) requires us to address that enumeration if it will affect the proceedings below.” (emphasis omitted)). 22 OCGA § 36-33-5 (a) (emphasis supplied). 23 OCGA § 13-6-11. 24 246 Ga. App. 524 (541 SE2d 92) (2000). 25 See Greater Atlanta Homebuilders Ass’n, Inc. v. City of McDonough, 322 Ga. App. 627, 629 (1) (745 SE2d 830) (2013). 26 See City of Statesboro v. Dabbs, 289 Ga. 669, 670 (1) (a) (715 SE2d 73) (2011) (“As is clear from the plain text of this statute, it applies to tort claims regarding personal injury or property damage . . ..”). 27 See Greater Atlanta Homebuilders Ass’n, 322 Ga. App. at 629 (1). Cf. Dabbs, 289 Ga. at 670 (1) (<HOLDING>); City of Atlanta v. Benator, 310 Ga. App. 597,
holding that antelitem notice statute did not apply to claims for violations of the open meetings act holding that the limitation act does not apply to claims brought under the oil pollution act holding that the limitation act does not apply to claims brought under the clean water act holding that alleged violations of a state statute did not give rise to federal constitutional claims holding that the district court erred in finding violations that were not alleged specifically in the plaintiffs notice letter and no penalties could be imposed for those violations