Mayor of Savannah v. Batson-Cook Co.
291 Ga. 114
| Ga. | 2012Background
- Contract dispute regarding design and construction of an underground parking garage in Chatham County, resulting in a multi‑million‑dollar verdict against the City and judgment in Troup County.
- Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment in Mayor &c. of Savannah v. Batson‑Cook Co., 310 Ga. App. 878 (714 SE2d 242) (2011).
- The City petitioned for writ of certiorari to challenge the trial judge’s denial of a motion to recuse rather than referring it to another judge.
- USCR 25.3 requires a three‑part threshold: timeliness, legally sufficient affidavits, and facts that would warrant recusal if true.
- Affidavits alleged familial ties and related communications between counsel for Batson‑Cook and the trial judge, plus the judge’s self‑assignment to the case.
- The Supreme Court held the three prerequisites were met and remanded to have the motion to recuse heard by a different judge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the recusal motion was timely filed. | City contends timely per USCR 25.1. | Batson‑Cook argues timeliness satisfied by filing within five days of knowledge. | Yes; timely under USCR 25.1. |
| Whether the affidavits were legally sufficient under USCR 25.3. | Affidavits contained definite, specific facts of bias. | Affidavits lacked sufficient legal sufficiency or specificity. | Affidavits were legally sufficient. |
| Whether the facts alleged would warrant recusal if true. | Facts show potential bias from familial ties and communications. | Facts do not show impartiality concerns justifying recusal. | Yes; facts would warrant recusal. |
| Whether the trial judge should have referred the motion to a different judge. | Three prongs met, so referral required. | Refusal to refer was permissible. | Remand to a different judge for disposition. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wall v. Thurman, 283 Ga. 533 (2008) (standard for referring recusal after USCR 25.3 threshold)
- Echols v. Echols, 281 Ga. 546 (2007) (timeliness and sufficiency of recusal motions)
- Jones County v. A Mining Group, 285 Ga. 465 (2009) (impartiality standard under Canon 3E(1))
- Stephens v. Stephens, 249 Ga. 700 (1982) (due process and impartiality in judicial proceedings)
- Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (2009) (due process; appearance of bias matters for impartial tribunals)
- Central of Ga. R. Co. v. Lightsey, 198 Ga. App. 59 (1990) (origin of abuse‑of‑discretion review for recusal cases)
- Berger v. United States, 255 U.S. 22 (1921) (treats taking the truth of affidavits as true to assess recusal)