325 Ga. App. 293
Ga. Ct. App.2013Background
- Bennett sued Omni for pregnancy discrimination after EEOC charge; Omni counterclaimed for breach of the mediation agreement.
- Prior decision Omni Builders I reversed a partial summary judgment about mediation not producing a signed settlement.
- On remand, Omni sought to add Bennett’s counsel and firm as party-defendants to the counterclaim; trial court denied that addition and Bennett moved for summary judgment on Omni’s counterclaim.
- Bennett alleged fraudulent inducement against Dillard, asserting he induced mediation; Bennett later testified she relied on mediation contract terms, not any personal misrepresentation.
- During mediation (Nov. 2, 2008), the parties reached a proposed settlement memorandum for $65,000, but Dillard refused to sign and left the mediation; Bennett later sued to enforce the settlement and for related costs.
- In April 2012, the trial court barred Bennett’s counsel from testifying about the fraudulent inducement claim and denied Omni’s request to add Bennett’s counsel as party-defendants; the court granted Bennett summary judgment on Omni’s counterclaim and denied Dillard’s §9-15-14 fees; this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of mediation agreement counterclaim properly dismissed? | Omni contends the mediation agreement was breached by Bennett. | Bennett argues the agreement encompassed the settlement result and thus violated confidentiality. | Yes; dismissal affirmed; Bennett’s suit to enforce a settlement did not breach the confidentiality or the mediation contract. |
| entitlement to attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14 for fraudulent inducement claim? | Dillard seeks fees due to meritless fraudulent inducement claim. | Bennett’s claim lacked any justiciable issue of law or fact. | Reverse; the trial court erred in denying fees; there was no merit to the fraudulent inducement claim. |
| amount and allocation of fees; evidentiary hearing on fees warranted? | Dillard should recover reasonable fees; court should determine amount. | Fees should be determined on remand, with proper supporting evidence. | Remand for an evidentiary hearing limited to reasonable fees incurred by Dillard and properly awarded against Bennett’s counsel and/or law firm. |
Key Cases Cited
- Savannah Yacht Corp. v. Thunderbolt Marine, 297 Ga. App. 104 (GA. App. 2009) (contract interpretation where language unambiguous; enforce settlement.)
- Brown v. Kinser, 218 Ga. App. 385 (GA. App. 1995) (any evidence standard for 9-15-14 awards.)
- Bircoll v. Rosenthal, 267 Ga. App. 431 (GA. App. 2004) (voluntary dismissal does not bar 9-15-14 award.)
- Johnston v. Correale, 285 Ga. App. 870 (GA. App. 2007) (necessity of proving reasonableness of fees.)
- Bankston v. Warbington, 319 Ga. App. 821 (GA. App. 2013) (remand for fee amount; necessary findings.)
- Walker v. Walker, 293 Ga. App. 872 (GA. App. 2008) (awards require findings; reasonableness.)
- Cavin v. Brown, 246 Ga. App. 40 (GA. App. 2000) (evidence showing lack of merit supports fees.)