Reid v. Reid.
348 Ga. App. 550
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2019Background
- Ginger and Wayne Reid married in 1995, had two children, and engaged in protracted, highly contentious divorce litigation culminating in a 20-day bench trial and a 2015 final decree.
- Trial court awarded Ginger primary physical custody, alimony (up to 60 months), and the marital home; reserved attorney-fee issues for later submission.
- Ginger submitted attorney-affidavits and billing summaries (but not detailed time entries allocating fees to specific claims or sanctionable conduct); Wayne opposed the requests.
- Trial court awarded Ginger $250,000 under OCGA § 19-6-2 based on disparate financial resources and $473,394.41 under OCGA § 9-15-14(b) for Wayne’s litigating conduct it found lacked substantial justification.
- Wayne appealed the fee awards; this Court affirmed the § 19-6-2 award, affirmed liability under § 9-15-14(b) but vacated and remanded the § 9-15-14(b) amount because the trial court did not apportion fees to sanctionable conduct.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Reid) | Defendant's Argument (Wayne) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of § 19-6-2 fee award | Award appropriate given financial disparity; Ginger lacked resources | No evidence fees were reasonable or that Ginger lacked resources; court ignored family contributions to Ginger | Affirmed — court considered parties’ finances; statute doesn’t require fee-reasonableness findings |
| Liability under § 9-15-14(b) (sanction basis) | Wayne pursued positions without substantial justification; expanded and delayed litigation (custody claims, alcohol allegations, refusal to settle) | No sanctionable conduct; settlement refusal shouldn’t support fees | Liability affirmed — trial court’s findings identify sanctionable conduct |
| Amount of fees under § 9-15-14(b) | Submitted total billing summaries and affidavits | Argued Ginger failed to show which fees were tied to sanctionable conduct | Vacated and remanded — trial court must limit and explain fee award to fees attributable to sanctionable conduct |
| Admissibility/use of settlement offers | Settlement conduct shows unreasonable litigation and delay | Offers reflect compromise and should be excluded | Consideration allowed (waived or covered by statutory exception) for showing delay/abuse of process |
Key Cases Cited
- Landry v. Walsh, 342 Ga. App. 283 (vacatur/remand principles for deficient fee proof under § 9-15-14(b))
- Bankston v. Warbington, 319 Ga. App. 821 (remand for evidentiary hearing to establish fees tied to sanctionable conduct)
- Vines v. Vines, 292 Ga. 550 (§ 19-6-2 does not require explicit reasonableness findings)
- Hoard v. Beveridge, 298 Ga. 728 (standards for awarding attorney fees and appellate review)
- Moore v. Hullander, 345 Ga. App. 568 (lump-sum/unapportioned § 9-15-14(b) awards disallowed)
- Cohen v. Rogers, 341 Ga. App. 146 (need proof of actual costs and reasonableness for § 9-15-14 awards)
- Moon v. Moon, 277 Ga. 375 (§ 19-6-2 awards not premised on misconduct)
- Dave Lucas Co., Inc. v. Lewis, 293 Ga. App. 288 (vacatur where affidavits did not tie hours to sanctionable claim)