Travis Gearig v. Clark Gearig
A17A1054
| Ga. Ct. App. | Oct 11, 2017Background
- Clark Gearig owned 50% of three related LLCs and resigned as CEO in May 2016. After resigning, he requested access to the companies’ financial records, which was refused.
- In October 2016 Clark sued under OCGA § 14-11-313 seeking a court order to inspect records, a 60-day delay of any share-closing after documents were furnished, and an award of attorney fees and costs.
- The trial court entered an order (signed Nov. 28, entered Dec. 1, 2016) granting Gearig access to documents and a 60-day delay before closing but did not rule on the attorney-fee request.
- Travis Gearig and the companies filed direct appeals on Dec. 6, 2016 from that order.
- The appellee moved to dismiss the appeals, arguing the order was not final and appellants failed to use interlocutory-appeal procedures. The trial court later reaffirmed the attorney-fee claim remained pending and that the Dec. 1 order was not final.
- The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeals for lack of jurisdiction because the attorney-fee claim under OCGA § 14-11-313 remained pending in the trial court and appellants did not follow interlocutory-application procedures.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Dec. 1, 2016 order was a final, appealable judgment under OCGA § 5-6-34(a)(1) | Gearig (plaintiff) argued the attorney-fee claim remained pending, making the order nonfinal. | Appellants argued the order was final and attorney fees were collateral or not preserved, so direct appeal was proper. | Court held the order was not final because Gearig’s attorney-fee claim under OCGA § 14-11-313 remained pending; appellants failed to follow interlocutory-review procedures, so appeals were dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Citifinancial Svcs. v. Holland, 310 Ga. App. 480 (court treats judgment as final only if no issues remain)
- Caswell v. Caswell, 157 Ga. App. 710 (finality standard)
- American Express Co. v. Baker, 192 Ga. App. 21 (contrast on final-judgment intent)
- Sotter v. Stephens, 291 Ga. 79 (attorney-fee claims may be part of underlying case, not ancillary)
- Scruggs v. Ga. Dept. of Human Resources, 261 Ga. 587 (requirement to seek certificate for interlocutory review)
- Fein v. Chenault, 330 Ga. App. 222 (finality favored over piecemeal appeals)