Eidson v. Croutch
337 Ga. App. 542
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Croutch sued Eidson in Gwinnett County for negligence arising from a car accident; she later amended to correct Eidson’s residence and moved to transfer venue to DeKalb County.
- Eidson moved to dismiss for alleged failure to effect timely service under OCGA § 9-11-4(c).
- Croutch opposed the motion to dismiss and moved for attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14; the trial court awarded $5,405 in fees and separately granted the venue transfer to DeKalb.
- Eidson filed an application for discretionary review in this Court under OCGA § 5-6-35(a)(10) challenging the attorney-fees order.
- Eidson did not obtain a trial-court certificate of immediate review nor otherwise comply with OCGA § 5-6-34(b)’s interlocutory-appeal requirements.
- The Court considered whether the transfer made the fees order immediately appealable (OCGA § 5-6-34(d)) or whether the collateral-order doctrine applied, and concluded neither route conferred jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the attorney-fees order is immediately appealable though discretionary review was sought | Croutch: order is interlocutory and not directly appealable; Eidson needed interlocutory certification | Eidson: sought discretionary review under OCGA § 5-6-35(a)(10) so appeal should proceed | Held: Order is interlocutory; Eidson’s failure to follow OCGA § 5-6-34(b) deprives appellate court of jurisdiction |
| Whether the transfer order converted the proceeding into a final judgment making the fees order appealable under OCGA § 5-6-34(d) | Croutch: transfer did not end the proceeding; case remains pending below so transfer is not a final judgment | Eidson: transfer to another court rendered the transfer order final, making fees appealable | Held: Transfer was not a final judgment; the case continued in a different court, so fees order not immediately appealable |
| Whether the collateral-order doctrine permits immediate appeal of the fees award | Croutch: collateral-order doctrine does not apply because fees are reviewable after final judgment | Eidson: fees order is distinctive/separable and should be immediately reviewable | Held: Collateral-order doctrine does not apply—attorney-fees awards are effectively reviewable after final judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- Bailey v. Bailey, 266 Ga. 832 (1996) (interlocutory appeals require OCGA § 5-6-34(b) compliance even if discretionary)
- Expedia, Inc. v. City of Columbus, 305 Ga. App. 450 (2010) (failure to follow OCGA § 5-6-34(b) bars discretionary review of interlocutory order)
- Settendown Pub. Util., LLC v. Waterscape Util., LLC, 324 Ga. App. 652 (2013) (interlocutory appeal statute is jurisdictional)
- Griffith v. Ga. Bd. of Dentistry, 175 Ga. App. 533 (1985) (transfer order is not final where case remains pending in another court)
- Mauer v. Parker Fibernet, LLC, 306 Ga. App. 160 (2010) (transfer/ removal rulings are interlocutory and subject to interlocutory procedures)
- Dept. of Transp. v. Hardaway Co., 216 Ga. App. 262 (1995) (attorney-fee awards are reviewable after final judgment; not collateral orders)
- Netsphere, Inc. v. Baron, 799 F.3d 327 (5th Cir. 2015) (fee awards do not satisfy collateral-order doctrine)