HEWITT ASSOCIATES, LLC v. Rollins, Inc.
308 Ga. App. 848
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Northern Trust served as Rollins's plan administrator from 1995 to 2003 under the 2001 Agreement.
- 2001 Agreement required Rollins to pay monthly fees and allowed fund fees to be offset against Rollins' fees.
- Hewitt purchased Northern Trust's assets in 2003, assumed the 2001 Agreement, and administered Rollins's plan until 2006.
- Hewitt did not credit Rollins for fund fees and proposed a no-charge transition to a new platform, which Rollins did not sign.
- Rollins sued Hewitt in August 2006 for unpaid fund fees and sought attorney fees; Hewitt counterclaimed for breach/estoppel/quantum meruit.
- Jury awarded Rollins damages and attorney fees for breach of contract; Hewitt's counterclaims failed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rollins's contract claim was time-barred | Rollins asserts tolling under OCGA 9-3-96 for fraud. | Contract claim time-barred by 16-month limit from 2001 agreement. | Fraud tolling applicable; not time-barred as to some claims. |
| Whether the trial court should have given a special verdict on limitations | A special verdict would clarify discovery of breach. | No abuse; jury instructed on limitations; no need for special form. | No abuse; no requirement for a special verdict form. |
| Whether Rollins could recover attorney fees and costs | Fees recoverable under OCGA 13-6-11 due to defendant's bad faith. | No entitlement to fees. | Evidence supports bad faith; fees upheld. |
| Whether prejudgment interest rate was correct | Contractual rate of 1.5% per month should apply to all damages. | Rate applies only to contract balances, not all damages. | Contract rate applicable to all balances under the contract's broad wording. |
| Whether the counterclaim verdict was inconsistent | Counterclaim damages and fees show value of work, contradicting verdict. | No inconsistency; work had no value but not zero on all claims. | Verdict reasonably construed; no new trial required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Harris v. Tutt, 306 Ga.App. 377 (2010) (appellate standard: sufficiency of evidence to support verdict)
- Southern Telecom v. Level 3 Communications, LLC, 295 Ga.App. 268 (2008) (contract limitations and tolling principles)
- Teachers Retirement System of Ga. v. Plymel, 296 Ga.App. 839 (2009) (instructive on contractual interest rates and application)
- Columbia County v. Branton, 304 Ga.App. 149 (2010) (fraud tolling requirements and discovery rules)
- Cochran Mill Assoc. v. Stephens, 286 Ga.App. 241 (2007) (confidential relationship impact on discovery)
- PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP v. Bassett, 293 Ga.App. 274 (2008) (proving fraud through circumstantial evidence on damages)
- Palmer v. Barnes, 193 Ga.App. 105 (1989) (no inconsistency in awards when legal theories diverge)
- Docutronics, Inc. v. Reitman, 235 Ga.App. 268 (1998) (reasonable construction of otherwise ambiguous verdicts)