Jones v. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF FULTON COUNTY
315 Ga. App. 15
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- HOUSING Authority of Fulton County terminated CEO Jones for cause in Nov 2009; Jones sued for breach of his employment agreement and unpaid compensation.
- Jones supervised CFO and was responsible for HUD-funded programs; he certified funds would be used for specific housing projects and did not object to diversions.
- HUD funds were diverted to cover portability voucher payments; Red Oak proceeds were misused, undermining regular voucher funding and triggering budget crisis.
- Jones drafted a board memo acknowledging wrongdoing and indicating HUD action should have been taken; he did not dispute the violations caused the financial crisis.
- Board terminated Jones for cause; dispute centers on whether the cause was supported, and whether a deferred compensation/pension contribution was enforceable.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for the Authority on breach-for-cause and denied Jones’s partial summary judgment on the pension/deferred plan amount.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether misusing HUD funds supports termination for cause | Jones ratified CFO actions by acquiescence; he certified funds and failed to object. | Misuse by CFO and ratification by Jones constitutes cause under the contract. | Yes; misuse ratified by Jones supports termination for cause. |
| Whether the pension/deferred compensation term is enforceable under the statute of frauds | Parties agreed on a pension contribution amount. | No writing or ascertainable amount; parol evidence inadmissible. | Unenforceable; parol evidence insufficient to establish amount; contract falls under statute of frauds. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strength v. Lovett, 311 Ga. App. 35 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011) (summary judgment standard; material facts undisputed)
- Cowart v. Widener, 287 Ga. 622 (Ga. 2010) (summary judgment requires no genuine dispute on material facts)
- Ford Motor Co. v. Abercrombie, 207 Ga. 464 (Ga. 1950) (principal liable for agent's acts when ratified)
- Wielgorecki v. White, 133 Ga. App. 834 (Ga. Ct. App. 1975) (proof of ratification may be inferred from acts or silence)
- Dobbs v. Titan Properties, 178 Ga. App. 389 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986) (agent's acts and principal's knowledge; ratification considerations)
- Edwards v. Central Ga. HHS, 253 Ga. App. 304 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002) (parol evidence not admissible to prove contract terms under statute of frauds)
- Carter v. Hubbard, 224 Ga. App. 375 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997) (amounts of compensation require written terms; no writing here)
- Arby's, Inc. v. Cooper, 265 Ga. 240 (Ga. 1995) (promises of future compensation must be defined or based on formula)