Georgia Department of Community Health v. Data Inquiry, LLC
313 Ga. App. 683
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Data Inquiry sought to perform computer-related services for the Department under a proposed contract that would activate upon execution and payment of a $15,000 retainer.
- Work began November 12, 2007, before the Department signed or paid the retainer, under an unsigned proposed agreement.
- Data Inquiry invoiced $25,066.96 after completing services; the Department refused payment.
- Data Inquiry asserted breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and quantum meruit; the Department raised sovereign immunity and failure-to-state-a-claim defenses.
- The trial court denied the Department’s motion to dismiss; the appellate court reverses, holding sovereign immunity barred the claims except where a valid written contract exists.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a valid written contract exists to waive sovereign immunity. | Data Inquiry argues the unsigned documents and accompanying communications form a written contract. | Department contends no binding written contract existed. | No; no valid written contract shown; unsigned documents do not meet writing requirement. |
| Whether unjust enrichment or quantum meruit are barred by sovereign immunity. | Data Inquiry asserts equitable claims despite lack of a written contract. | Department asserts sovereign immunity bars equitable claims against the State. | Barred; equitable claims are not waived by the Constitution or statutes. |
| Whether Data Inquiry is entitled to attorney fees. | Data Inquiry seeks attorney fees under proposed contract and OCGA provisions. | Because contract/equitable claims fail, fees should be denied. | Fees must be dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Azarat Marketing Group v. Dept. of Administrative Affairs, 245 Ga.App. 256 (2000) (default admissions can create a jury issue for written contract existence)
- Bd. of Regents, etc. of Ga. v. Doe, 278 Ga.App. 878 (2006) (signed contemporaneous documents must include all terms to waive immunity)
- Merk v. DeKalb County, 226 Ga.App. 191 (1997) (implied contracts do not waive sovereign immunity)