GREEN TREE SERVICING, LLC v. JONES Et Al.
333 Ga. App. 184
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Joneses and Green Tree agreed to arbitrate disputes under the FAA; arbitrator awarded Joneses $4,800,000 on April 29, 2014.
- On May 1, 2014 the Joneses filed an application in state court to confirm the award and mailed a copy to Green Tree’s attorney the same day.
- The state court entered an order confirming the arbitration award and a final judgment the same day (less than an hour after filing and mailing).
- Green Tree had no actual notice or opportunity to respond before the court signed the confirmation and judgment; it later moved to vacate and timely appealed.
- The Court of Appeals considered whether federal FAA appellate rules preempt Georgia’s procedural rule on appeals from confirmation orders and whether entry of order and judgment on the same document affects jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether FAA preempts Georgia rule requiring a separate judgment for appeal | Joneses: FAA allows appeal directly from confirmation order | Green Tree: Georgia rule should apply or be preempted by FAA | Georgia procedural rule is not preempted; state rule applies because it is procedural and does not frustrate FAA objectives |
| Whether order and judgment must be on separate documents to be appealable | Joneses: appeal was from final judgment; separate-doc requirement not mandatory | Green Tree: Barge suggested separate documents required for appealability | Court overruled Barge dicta to the extent it required separate documents; separate documents not required for jurisdiction |
| Whether service by mail and immediate entry of confirmation satisfied due process | Joneses: service by mail completed; order proper | Green Tree: mailing same day did not provide meaningful notice or opportunity to respond before entry | Entry of confirmation and judgment the same day as mailed service deprived Green Tree of due process; judgment is void and must be vacated |
| Whether error was harmless because Green Tree had no meritorious objections to the award | Joneses: even with procedural defect, result would be the same—harmless | Green Tree: due process violation requires vacatur regardless of merits | Court rejects harmless-error argument; due process violation requires vacatur and remand for reconsideration |
Key Cases Cited
- Bull HN Information Systems, Inc. v. Hutson, 229 F.3d 321 (1st Cir. 2000) (FAA permits appeal from confirmation order in certain circumstances)
- Volt Information Sciences, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior Univ., 489 U.S. 468 (1989) (states may apply neutral procedural rules so long as they do not undermine FAA objectives)
- D. H. Blair & Co. v. Gottdiener, 462 F.3d 95 (2d Cir. 2006) (application to confirm award is treated as a motion in an ongoing proceeding)
- Peralta v. Heights Medical Center, Inc., 485 U.S. 80 (1988) (entry of judgment without due process notice is void)
- Barge v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 245 Ga. App. 112 (2000) (discussed and limited; dicta regarding separate documents overruled)
- American Gen. Financial Svcs. v. Jape, 291 Ga. 637 (2012) (state procedural rules govern where they do not conflict with FAA)