Civil Appeals

In a case construing the recently enacted Superior and State Court Appellate Practice Act, the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the opposing party’s petition for review, upholding the judgment in our client’s favor. The Court agreed that the petitioner failed to comply with a clear court-ordered deadline to file proof of service, which required dismissal. This ruling leaves the original magistrate court judgment for our client in full force and effect. The opinion also confirms that Georgia courts will not automatically import Georgia Civil Practice Act case law into the Superior and State Court Appellate Practice Act, particularly where the new Act contains its own procedural rules and no cross-reference to the CPA.

This case concerned a dispute over the language of an agreement to loan money in exchange for a deed of property. The agreement stated, “loan is to be repaid by the lender,” and borrower argued that this meant there was no due date for repayment. The trial court granted summary judgment to the borrower. On appeal, Julie and co-counsel successfully achieved a reversal of the decision. The Court of Appeals agreed with our argument that the loan agreement had scrivener’s errors that precluded summary judgment. Thus, the case was allowed to return to the trial court for further proceedings.

A condominium Board issued ad hoc rules against an owner, barring a family member from the premises without an escort. The unit owner sued to invalidate the rule. The trial court dismissed the case for the unit owner’s failure to follow the condominium’s governing documents concerning pre-suit dispute resolution procedures. The dismissal meant that the owners would have to abide by the rule, so the owners hired Julie to assist with briefing an appeal to the Georgia Court of Appeals. On appeal, Julie and co-counsel successfully achieved a reversal of the decision. The Court of Appeals agreed with our argument that the condominium Board waived the requirement in bylaws that residents request and attend a hearing before filing lawsuit. Thus, the case was allowed to return to the trial court for further proceedings, including a decision on the fairness of the rule at issue.

In this case concerning a dispute over a residential property deeded as a gift to our client, we were hired to appeal a verdict granting the property to the opponent. Julie prevailed on the appeal, arguing that the trial was fundamentally unfair as the jury was not advised that the grant of the property fell under gift law; the Court of Appeals agreed and granted the client a new trial.

This matter involved a challenge to a grant of summary judgment on a claim of title by adverse possession. Julie successfully obtained a reversal of summary judgment. The court’s opinion clarifies that to prevail on adverse possession, the claimant must enter upon the land claiming in good faith the right to do so and cannot have reason to believe another has valid title; to enter upon the land without any honest claim of right to do so is but a trespass.

Atlanta condominium unit owners filed suit against a condominium association in connection with mold damage in their unit. The association charged the unit owners with the association’s litigation fees and expenses, as an assessment under the “common expense” provision of the declaration of covenants. That provision stated, in essence, that any common expenses caused by the conduct of a unit owner could be charged to the unit owner. Yet using this provision to charge litigation defense costs was unprecedented. Julie prevailed in arguing on behalf of the unit owners that the association was not entitled to use that provision to charge its litigation expenses to the unit owners.

Atlanta area homeowners were sued by their homeowners association concerning a restrictive covenant prohibiting them from using their garage for storage. Julie successfully argued on appeal that, because the association did not achieve 2/3 of the vote of the community when adopting the restriction, it could not enforce the restriction against homeowners who did not vote for the restriction or consent to it in writing.

Upon a second appeal of the Marino case, Julie prevailed in a dispute over attorney fees owed to the homeowners.

Julie Liberman successfully represented a condominium association in a suit to recover unpaid condominium assessments, including utility charges. Upon the condominium owner’s appeal, she attained affirmance of the trial court’s order on behalf of the association, establishing precedent that utilities are part of a condominium’s assessments.