Sherman v. City of Atlanta, 293 Ga. 169

Appellants Sherman and Eichler appealed a trial court judgment validating and confirming a City of Atlanta bond issuance under OCGA § 36-82-60 to 36-82-85 (Revenue Bond Law).
The State, through Fulton County DA, petitioned for judgment confirming up to $35 million in Perry-Bolton TAD bonds; the named defendants were the City, Fulton County, and Atlanta Public Schools.
A bond validation hearing was set for May 8, 2012; public notice was given as required.
Before the hearing, Sherman and Eichler filed a verified Objection claiming they were Georgia citizens and City residents with the right to become parties and object; they did not attend the hearing.
No competent evidence appeared in the record demonstrating that Sherman or Eichler were Georgia citizens or Atlanta residents at the time the Objection was filed, and no witnesses or exhibits were introduced to prove standing.
The trial court ultimately overruled the objections on the merits and issued a judgment validating the bonds; Appellants timely appealed, and this Court later ordered briefing on standing and appealability.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Appellants had standing to become parties under OCGA § 36-82-77(a).	Sherman and Eichler were Georgia citizens and Atlanta residents, hence they could intervene.	Appellees contend no proof of citizenship or residency was presented; standing not established.	Appellants lacked standing to become parties and to appeal; appeal dismissed.
Whether the trial court erred by addressing merits before determining standing.	Standing disputed, should have been decided before merits.	Record allowed merits consideration; objections were addressed.	Standing must be determined before merits; error to decide merits without standing.
Whether the Objection's citizenship and residency allegations were proven by admissible evidence.	Statements in the Objection and Eichler’s verification suffice to prove citizenship/residency.	No admissible evidence or witnesses were presented; pleadings are not evidence.	No competent proof of citizenship or residency; record lacked admissible evidence to establish standing.
Whether Appellants can appeal a trial judgment they did not have standing to obtain.	Appellants had standing to appeal as interested party.	Only parties at the time of judgment can appeal; Appellants were not proper parties.	Lack of standing to appeal requires dismissal of the appeal.

Allison v. Dept. of Human Resources, 276 Ga. 175 (2003) (standing burden when disputed (Georgia))
Perdue v. Lake, 282 Ga. 348 (2007) (residency as fact to establish standing)
Thompson v. Brown, 288 Ga. 855 (2011) (even if facts are known, need record proof for venue)
Rolland v. Martin, 281 Ga. 190 (2006) (verified complaint not automatically evidence; role of evidence)
Sherman v. Atlanta Independent School System (Sherman I), 293 Ga. 268 (2013) (discusses history of TAD financing and standing issues)
Sherman v. Development Authority of Fulton County (Sherman II), 321 Ga. App. 550 (2013) (intervention procedures and standing considerations)