Olin Wooten v. Darrell Williams
342 Ga. App. 511
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Wooten (Olin Wooten, Guy P. Brown/G.P. Brown, LLC, and Perry Brown) sued the Williamses (Darrell and Bonnie) to establish a private (prescriptive) way across the Williamses’ property and sought removal of obstructions.
- The Williamses counterclaimed for damages alleging harassment, threats, and interference with use and enjoyment of their property by Olin Wooten.
- A jury found that Wooten established a prescriptive easement and awarded $5,000 to the Williamses on their counterclaim; the verdict did not specify the easement’s precise location or order removal of obstructions.
- Multiple plats were admitted; a 2006 Perry Brown plat showed a 20-foot access road across the Williamses’ Parcel 2 and Parcel 5 (with bearings and lengths L18/L19) and matched long‑term use and county maintenance evidence.
- Trial court judgment followed the verdict; Wooten sought amendment to incorporate the Perry Brown plat and to direct removal of obstructions; Williamses moved for JNOV/directed verdict arguing Wooten failed to prove location/width.
- Appeals consolidated: A17A1338 (Wooten) and A17A1340/A17A1339 (Williamses, latter dismissed as redundant). Court: affirm in part, reverse/vacate/remand in part (Wooten appeal), and affirm Williamses’ appeal that challenged sufficiency.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction re: notice of appeal filed before JNOV motion | Wooten: appeal timely; trial court divestiture effective | Williamses: appeal premature because JNOV was filed same day | Court denied dismissal; timely appeal before JNOV preserved by rule delaying divestiture until JNOV resolved (Geeter rule) |
| Whether Williamses could recover damages for deprivation of use/enjoyment when prescriptive easement found | Wooten: prescriptive easement finding precludes damages for interference | Williamses: damages arise from Olin’s separate harassment/threats, distinct from easement use | Held for Williamses: harassment evidence supported separate damages award |
| Whether judgment must be amended to identify location/width of easement (incorporate Perry Brown plat) | Wooten: judgment should conform to verdict/evidence by incorporating Perry Brown plat showing 20‑ft road (L18/L19) | Williamses: verdict alone sufficient; other plats conflicted | Court reversed trial court denial, vacated portion of judgment, and remanded with direction to amend judgment to incorporate Perry Brown plat because evidence and jury instruction (≤20 ft) support that location/width |
| Whether judgment should order Williamses to remove obstructions from the easement | Wooten: complaint sought removal; judgment should direct removal | Williamses: jury was not asked to identify or order removal of obstructions | Court rejected amendment to mandate removal (would be substantive change); Wooten may seek probate‑court relief under OCGA § 44‑9‑59 |
| Sufficiency challenge (directed verdict/JNOV) that Wooten failed to prove location/width | Williamses: no sufficient evidence of easement location/width | Wooten: Perry Brown plat and witness testimony established location/width | Court affirmed denial of JNOV/directed verdict; evidence supported jury verdict (per Division 3(a)) |
Key Cases Cited
- Housing Authority of City of Atlanta v. Geeter, 252 Ga. 196 (rule delaying divestiture of trial court jurisdiction when post‑judgment motion timely filed)
- Jones v. State, 309 Ga. App. 149 (timing of notice of appeal versus post‑judgment motions)
- Davis v. Overall, 301 Ga. App. 4 (recovery for deprivation of use and enjoyment; damages for harassment)
- Taylor v. Taylor, 212 Ga. 637 (judgment must conform to verdict and follow jury’s true meaning; consider pleadings/evidence)
- Floyd v. Thurman, 242 Ga. 428 (use of a plat admitted at trial to describe boundary when jury verdict is in favor of party relying on that plat)
- Park v. Nichols, 307 Ga. App. 841 (standard of review for denial of directed verdict/JNOV)