WILLIAMS Et Al. v. MINERVA TAX RECEIVABLES, LLC Et Al.
338 Ga. App. 895
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Minerva Tax Receivables, LLC filed a quiet title action after a foreclosure sale against Deborah Jean Richards Williams.
- Williams asserted counterclaims against Minerva and others; the trial court appointed a special master.
- The special master reported Minerva was entitled to fee simple title and that Williams’s counterclaims impermissibly attacked the foreclosure.
- The trial court entered final judgment vesting title in Minerva and ordered each party (Minerva and Williams) to pay $3,179.73 in special master’s fees within 30 days.
- Williams appealed but conceded she had not paid her share of the special master’s fee and challenged the fee allocation and the court’s authority to assess it.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether unpaid special master fees bar the appeal | Williams: trial court should not have ordered her to pay; Harpagon rule limits post-appeal fee assessment | Minerva: OCGA § 9-7-22(c) makes auditor/special master fees a jurisdictional precondition to appeal | Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because Williams did not pay her fee |
| Whether Harpagon's interlocutory rule prevents fee assessment here | Williams: cites Harpagon (trial court lost jurisdiction after notice of appeal) | Minerva: final judgment including fees was entered before Williams appealed, so Harpagon is inapplicable | Harpagon inapplicable because fee assessment was part of final judgment before appeal |
| Whether Williams can challenge merits before satisfying appeal prerequisites | Williams: argues Minerva should pay entire fee because Minerva should have lost on merits | Minerva: appellant must satisfy jurisdictional prerequisites first | Court: Williams cannot challenge merits until she pays the assessed fee and meets appeal requirements |
| Whether a special master is an "auditor" for OCGA § 9-7-22(c) purposes | Williams: implicit contest that fee requirement shouldn’t apply | Minerva: special master is an auditor under the statute | Court follows precedent: special master qualifies as an auditor and fee payment is mandatory and jurisdictional |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. Harpagon Co., 300 Ga. App. 644 (2009) (holding a special master is an "auditor" under OCGA § 9-7-22(c) and fee payment is jurisdictional precondition to appeal)
- Davis v. Harpagon Co., 281 Ga. 250 (2006) (interlocutory appeal ruling that trial court lost jurisdiction to assess interim special master fees after notice of appeal)
- Sorrentino v. Boston Mut. Life Ins. Co., 206 Ga. App. 771 (1992) (fee-payment requirement before appeal is mandatory and jurisdictional)