Parham v. Weldon
333 Ga. App. 744
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- In 2011 Weldon hired Parham (North Georgia Custom Paint & Body) to restore a 1969 Ford Bronco for $9,470; Weldon paid in full but Parham did not finish the job and the vehicle was damaged while in his custody.
- Weldon sued and sought a TRO; Parham did not answer, the court ordered return of the vehicle and entered default judgment as to liability, reserving damages for later hearing.
- Weldon served requests for admissions as to damages and attorney fees; Parham failed to timely respond and Weldon moved for summary judgment based on deemed admissions.
- Parham filed a verified motion to withdraw the admissions, asserting (among other things) changed scope of work, a request for more payment, denial that he caused the damage, and that the vehicle retained some value. The trial court denied withdrawal for lack of an affidavit.
- Parham later filed a second motion with an affidavit; the trial court granted summary judgment to Weldon on damages and fees without expressly ruling on the second motion. Parham appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Weldon) | Defendant's Argument (Parham) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred by denying motion to withdraw admissions for lack of affidavit | Admissions were deemed admitted because defendant failed to timely respond and no affidavit supported withdrawal | Verified motion contains sworn statements and functions as an affidavit; it suffices to raise genuine factual disputes | Court reversed: denial abused discretion because verified motion is equivalent to an affidavit and provided admissible evidence of a factual dispute |
| Whether summary judgment based on deemed admissions was proper | Summary judgment proper because admissions established damages and fees with no genuine issue of material fact | Summary judgment improper if admissions were permissibly withdrawn or if verified motion raised material factual disputes | Court reversed summary judgment because it was premised on the erroneous denial of withdrawal; trial court may revisit withdrawal on other permissible grounds |
Key Cases Cited
- Velasco v. Chambless, 295 Ga. App. 376 (sets standard that trial court has broad discretion to permit withdrawal of admissions)
- Brankovic v. Snyder, 259 Ga. App. 579 (explains two-part test for permitting withdrawal of admissions)
- Fox Run Properties, LLC v. Murray, 288 Ga. App. 568 (describes that admissions must be refutable by admissible evidence with a modicum of credibility)
- Rolland v. Martin, 281 Ga. 190 (verified pleadings may function as affidavits/evidence)
- Bailey v. Chase Third Century Leasing Co., 211 Ga. App. 60 (withdrawing admissions can preclude summary judgment if admissible evidence is presented)
- Watson v. Elberton-Elbert County Hosp. Auth., 229 Ga. 26 (an abuse of discretion occurs when a ruling is based on an erroneous view of the law)