Sherman v. Development Authority of Fulton County
314 Ga. App. 237
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Bond validation proceeding initiated December 2010 under Georgia Revenue Bond Law to authorize DAFC's taxable revenue bonds and security for a multi-use facility to be developed by 1138 Peachtree Land Holdings.
- Sherman, a Fulton County resident, intervened with objections and requested findings of fact and conclusions of law under OCGA § 9-11-52(a).
- Superior Court, after a bench hearing, entered a judgment validating and confirming bonds and bond security, but did not mention Sherman or provide requested findings.
- Sherman contested several grounds for denying validation; the court rejected them and entered judgment without requested findings.
- On appeal, Sherman challenged the absence of findings of fact and conclusions of law and argued remand or dismissal was appropriate; DAFC indicated bonds were not issued and sought mootness.
- This Court vacated the judgment and remanded for entry of findings and conclusions, or dismissal if remand would serve no purpose.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the judgment violated OCGA 9-11-52(a) by not providing findings of fact/conclusions of law. | Sherman requested findings of fact and conclusions of law. | DAFC contends remand/dismissal appropriate. | Remanded for entry of findings; judgment vacated. |
| Whether the case should be remanded for findings or dismissed as moot given bonds not issued. | Remand with findings to permit appellate review. | Bonds not issued; case should be mooted or dismissed on remand. | Remand directed; dismissal as moot possible if appropriate on remand. |
| Whether Sherman was a proper intervenor with standing to challenge the validation. | Sherman intervened under OCGA § 36-82-77. | No argument against intervenor status. | Intervenor status recognized; issues reviewable on appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Grantham v. Grantham, 269 Ga. 413 (1998) (findings of fact and conclusions of law enable proper appellate review)
- Sanders v. Stone, 255 Ga. 704 (1986) (vacate to enter findings and conclusions for review)
- In the Interest of D.L.G., 212 Ga.App. 353 (1994) (requirement to state process and basis for conclusions)
- Payson v. Payson, 274 Ga. 231 (2001) (interplay of findings and conclusions; mandatory vs discretionary)
- Jerome Road, LLC v. First Citizens Bank and Trust Co., 312 Ga.App. 583 (2011) (statutory framework; clarity on findings on remand)
- Hunter v. Hunter, 289 Ga. 9 (2011) (statutory interpretation of OCGA § 9-11-52; findings not automatically required)