Fulton County v. Lord
323 Ga. App. 384
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Judicial staff attorneys (law clerks) for Fulton County alleged pay disparity with County Attorney staff attorneys (CASAs) despite identical job classification and duties; CASAs received a "Schedule B" premium (~36%) that law clerks did not.
- Law clerks filed an internal civil-service group-pay grievance, proceeded to arbitration after administrative appeals and a superior court writ ordering grievance hearing and arbitration rights.
- Arbitrator found the County violated its policies, awarded injunctive relief directing parity effective January 1, 2012, and awarded $4,354,692.90 in back pay plus prejudgment interest after resolving a sovereign-immunity challenge.
- County sought to dismiss/vacate or modify the award (arguing sovereign immunity barred back pay and that a stipulation on damages was mistaken); superior court confirmed the award, denied County relief, and entered judgment.
- Superior court awarded law clerks $94,557.50 in attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14; appeals followed by County (challenging confirmation, modification, and fee award) and cross-appeal by law clerks (effective date of parity).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiffs' Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sovereign immunity bars law clerks' back-pay claim | Back pay sounds in contract; sovereign immunity does not bar recovery for wages | Sovereign immunity bars monetary awards against counties; arbitrator manifestly disregarded law by awarding back pay | Held for plaintiffs: back-pay claim sounds in contract and is not barred; no manifest disregard by arbitrator |
| Whether County may modify award based on alleged mistake in stipulation for damages | Stipulation was agreed during arbitration; award final and timely confirmed | Stipulation produced inflated damages and was a mistake warranting relief/modification | Held for plaintiffs: County untimely sought modification (did not comply with three-month limit); court did not err in denying relief |
| Proper effective date for remedying pay parity (arbitrator vs. court judgment) | Arbitrator fixed parity effective Jan 1, 2012; judgment must conform to award | Court used language "henceforth," arguably tying parity to entry of judgment | Held for plaintiffs in part: judgment must conform to award; superior court's order changed effective date and that portion is vacated and remanded to conform to arbitrator's date |
| Whether attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14 were warranted and appropriately allocated | County advanced legally unsupported manifest-disregard argument; fees are mandatory where claim lacked any justiciable issue; disputed billing entries related to sanctionable conduct | County contended its position was legally tenable and fees included entries unrelated to sanctionable conduct | Held for plaintiffs: fee award affirmed; County's manifest-disregard argument lacked justification and billing entries were related to the confirmation opposing arguments |
Key Cases Cited
- Brookfield Country Club, Inc. v. St. James-Brookfield, LLC, 299 Ga. App. 614 (Ga. App. 2009) (describing limited judicial review of arbitration awards and manifest-disregard standard)
- Reason v. DeKalb County, 222 Ga. 63 (Ga. 1966) (county employee back-pay claim sounds in contract and is not barred by sovereign immunity)
- Willis v. City of Atlanta, 265 Ga. App. 640 (Ga. App. 2004) (government employee wage claims characterized as contractual, not barred by immunity)
- Cypress Comm., Inc. v. Zacharias, 291 Ga. App. 790 (Ga. App. 2008) (motions to vacate or modify arbitration awards are subject to statutory time limits)
- Roylston v. Bank of America, N.A., 290 Ga. App. 556 (Ga. App. 2008) (standards for awarding attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14)