HAWKINS Et Al. v. BLAIR Et Al.
334 Ga. App. 898
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Jordan and Jacob Hawkins, South Carolina residents, sued South Carolina attorney James A. Blair III and his firm (Nexsen Pruet) in Fulton County, Georgia, alleging malpractice, conversion, and larceny by a fiduciary based on wire transfers from custodial Morgan Stanley accounts in Atlanta to Nexsen Pruet accounts in Greenville, SC.
- The transfers occurred after a Stephens County, GA trust litigation in which Blair (acting pro hac vice) represented the Hawkinses; the Stephens County court ordered distribution of custodial accounts "pursuant to written instructions of counsel for the [Appellants], Nexsen Pruet, LLC."
- Appellants alleged Blair directed six wire transfers (totaling roughly $117,000–$120,000) from October 2010 over eight months without notifying or obtaining authorization from the Hawkinses.
- Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and on forum non conveniens grounds; the trial court sustained personal jurisdiction but dismissed under forum non conveniens.
- Appellants argued the court delayed ruling beyond statutory 90 days, improperly ruled without allowing discovery tied to venue, and erred in granting dismissal; the trial court made findings on the seven statutory forum-non-conveniens factors and dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court exceeded authority by ruling after the 90-day discovery stay under OCGA § 9-11-12(j) | Court was required to decide within 90 days; ruling later was improper | 90-day rule is directory, not jurisdiction-limiting; court retains authority to decide later | Court: No error; statute is directory and appellants showed no specific harm from delay |
| Whether court abused discretion by ruling on motion to dismiss without allowing discovery on venue | Hawkinses sought jurisdictional/venue discovery and contended necessary facts remained unknown | Defendants argued no specific discovery would affect forum-non-conveniens analysis | Court: No abuse; plaintiffs failed to identify evidence discovery would produce relevant to venue |
| Whether dismissal for forum non conveniens was proper (balancing seven factors) | Fulton County was proper because the wire transfers occurred in Atlanta and certain critical bank witnesses are in GA | Most parties, records, and relevant evidence (attorney-client relationship, fee payments, accounting) are in SC; application of SC law, witness convenience, and administrative burden favor SC | Court: Dismissal affirmed; four factors (including administrative difficulty and local interest) favored SC, only plaintiff’s choice of forum favored GA |
| Whether punitive damages availability in GA (but possibly not in SC) should preclude dismissal | Plaintiffs argued potential for punitive damages in GA weighs against dismissal | Argument not raised below; issue waived on appeal | Court: Waived; cannot raise for first time on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Gowdy v. Schley, 317 Ga. App. 693 (trial court’s forum non conveniens decision reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Collier v. Wehmeier, 313 Ga. App. 421 (defendant bears burden to show forum non conveniens dismissal appropriate)
- Wang v. Liu, 292 Ga. 568 (appellate meaningful review of forum non conveniens; better practice to make specific findings on each statutory factor)
- Killearn, Inc. v. Southern Structural, 308 Ga. App. 494 (affirming trial court findings on venue if supported by any evidence)
- Charles H. Wesley Ed. Foundation v. State Election Bd., 282 Ga. 707 (statutory time limits phrased without negative words are generally directory)
- Settles Bridge Farm v. Masino, 318 Ga. App. 576 (trial court not abusing discretion in denying extended discovery absent showing of need to resolve motion to dismiss)
- Dowis v. Mud Slingers, Inc., 279 Ga. 808 (tort governed by substantive law of state where tort was committed)
- Bullard v. MRA Holding, 292 Ga. 748 (locus delicti is place where last event making actor liable occurred)
- Locke’s Graphic & Vinyl Signs v. Citicorp Vendor Finance, 285 Ga. App. 826 (issues not raised below are waived on appeal)
- Hewett v. Raytheon Aircraft Co., 273 Ga. App. 242 (trial court should address and balance forum non conveniens factors)