Fowler's Holdings, LLLP v. CLP Family Investments, L.P.
318 Ga. App. 73
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- CLP and the Pennington estate sued Fowler’s for specific performance and damages related to easement agreements on a Macon shopping center parking lot.
- CLP alleged Fowler’s failed to maintain the lot and breached a promise limiting new entry points; amended complaints added rescission, nominal damages, and attorney fees.
- Bench trial; trial court awarded CLP $120,000 in nominal damages and $55,000 in attorney fees.
- On appeal, Fowler’s challenged the nominal-damages award as legally incorrect and objected to the fee award as unsupported by the evidence.
- The appellate court agreed the nominal-damages award was excessive, reversed in part, and remanded for a new damages trial; it upheld the attorney-fee award under OCGA § 13-6-11.
- Evidence showed CLP sought substantial actual damages, but the court-found nominal damages despite not being trivial in relation to claimed damages.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the nominal damages award excessive as a matter of law? | CLP argues nominal damages should reflect trivial loss. | Fowler’s asserts the award is within appropriate nominal-damages range. | Nominal damages were excessive; remanded for new damages trial. |
| Should the trial court’s costs of repair finding be reviewed on remand? | CLP contends error in the cost-of-repair finding. | Fowler’s contends no issue with the finding beyond nominal damages. | Remand to reconsider the cost-of-repair finding; no final ruling on it here. |
| Is the attorney-fee award under OCGA § 13-6-11 supported by the record? | CLP seeks fees apportioned to successful breach claims and argues evidence supports recovery. | Fowler’s asserts improper apportionment or lack of evidence linking fees to successful claims. | Yes; the award is supported, and apportionment was within the evidence before the court. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sellers v. Mann, 113 Ga. 643 (Ga. 1901) (nominal damages are a trivial sum to vindicate rights when no actual loss shown)
- Foote & Davies Co. v. Malony, 115 Ga. 985 (Ga. 1902) (nominal damages cover costs of bringing action when no actual damages exist)
- King v. Brock, 282 Ga. 56 (Ga. 2007) (nominal damages as a peg to hang costs on)
- Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Stephens, 14 Ga. App. 173 (Ga. App. 1914) (nominal damages considerations in various contexts)
- Duckworth v. Collier, 164 Ga. App. 139 (Ga. App. 1982) (nominal damages in relation to claimed actual damages)
- First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. v. White, 168 Ga. App. 516 (Ga. App. 1983) (nominal damages framework in appellate review)