*1 strictly property process owner, con- the statute must be due to the the body.”Dorsey Dept. Transp., condemning formed to 707). superior view, autho In our court was taking the declaration of DOT as condemnor to recast rized to direct reasonably personalty fixtures, and did include foreseeable doing. 32-3-11 not abuse its discrеtion so OCGA Eldridge, Blackburn and concur. affirmed. Attorney Cathy Baker, General, A. Cox-Brakefield, Thurbert E. Attorney Dwyer, Sapp, Sapp, General, White & Anne W. Assistant Womack,for Ronald R.
Coppedge, Coppedge, appel- Ward, Jr., Leman & Warren N. lees. GEORGIA,
A98A0904. & MOBILE HOMES OF INC.
v. HARALSON.
Judge Harold R. Banke. Georgia, Ozie H. Haralson sued M & M Mobile Homes of Inc. (“M M”), d/b/a & a dealer of manufactured housing Destiny Industries, Inc., a manufacturer of the same. purported problems Some of Haralson’s related to the manufacture of pertained set-up by the home and dealer, others to its M & M.1 proper Industries, Inc. answered the response, although timely However, M fashion. & M’s filed with the two-page stationery court, awas letter on Home Center’s manager, Hardy Ogltree, from M & M’s lot addressed to Haralson’s lawyer. Ogltree’s Response” letter denoted itself as “Exhibit A specifically 96CV33251E,” rеferred to “Ozie Haralson” and “File No. complaint. the responded detail, case number of Haralson’s In some the letter paragraphs grievances numbеred 1-13 to each of the 13 complaint. listed A as Exhibit to Haralson’s This document specific including refrigerator open- addressed each slab, claim ing, carрet countertop problem, seam, etc.
Apparently meager based on the conclusion that a synonymous any answer, with no M & M was not served with 1 Among things, level, сountertop other Haralson claimed that the slab was not had replaced, opening small, refrigerator living not been for his was too and a seam carpet reworking. room needed (a). any motion. See OCGA 9-11-5
of the trial or with hearing this document constituted determine whether Without (“CPA”), Act of the Civil Practice “an answer” within trial court
held M & in default. defendants two When the case *2 preliminary present. instructions, the trial In Industries was respond jury or to file to M & M’sfailure to the that due court advised any The M M “liable as a matter of law.” lawsuit, to thе & was answer jury by default, M & M had of the the virtue court instructed liability. During trial, conceded the Industries admitted its “may problems there,” claimed it some but that there tried to correct heapеd M, M the absent
them the blame on & damages, $6,150 $2,050 in in actual defendant. The attorney punitive M & M. After fees, $7,000 unsuccessfully learning attempted to move the M & about appeals. trial and Hеld: for a new now determining
1. M & M contends that the trial court erred by manager Milledgeville lot the court of its letter filed with legal agree. complaint The was did not cоnstitute a answer. We by leaving manager copy of M & M’s sales lot served a Milledgeville. manager, nonlawyer, responded to the The by a letter addressed to Hаralson’s counsel on response filed as a and served on letterhead. This letter was (216 App. Rearden, 815, 134 Ga. 816 SE2d counsel. See Robinson v. 370) (1975) style (timely pro setting se fоrth and case filed answer disputing sufficient to with- number and date of note at issue was judgment). moving Rather than to strike the stand motion for default moving entry default, an Haralson se answer or by ignoring response though as no answer had been filed. party given opportu- “[U]nder notice and the the CPA nity pleadings where such notice will facilitate to amend defective irrevocably penalize party decision on the merits. The CPA does not McDonough misstep pleading.” v. McLendon for one Constr. Co. (1978). (250 424) § OCGA 9-11-8 Co., 510, Elec. 242 Ga. 515 SE2d See (f). provide purpose responsive pleadings notice of the The is to part or in defenses raised and the averments controvertеd whole Co., Iron 143 the defendant. See Tahamtan v. Dixie Ornamental 217) (1977). App. shows that SE2d The record Ga. pleading spoke M M in Haralson received such notice frоm & to each of his 13 that the grievances. include: a of relief from an insufficient answer avenues judgment pleadings. dismiss, strike, or for
motion to
motion to
(b)
(f).
(c),
(6),
object
party
except
to the
Or a
or
OCGA 9-11-12
Brown, 217 Ga.
of a letter as a sufficient answer. Brown v.
treatment
App.
motions would
Each of these
246
SE2d
writing
have been
M & M
to have beеn
with a
served on
opportunity
respond.
Brown,
who would have had an
App.
pursued
at 246. OCGA 9-11-7
Haralson
none of
given
these
being
alternatives. & was
no notice that its answer was
opportunity
attacked and
afforded an
to defend or
(liberal
McDonough
Co.,
amend it.
Constr.
App. judgment against at 246. In view of the cases, above M & M principles violated of fundamental fairness and must be reversed. holding, remaining 2. In of this we need not reach the *3 enumerations of error. Beasley specially. reversed. and Ruffin, concur Judge, concurring specially.
Beasley, 1. I concur for the reason that Haralson’s suit was in instituted applicability holding December before the date of Supreme Georgia TechnologyGroup, Court of Eckles Atlanta manager Ogltree Sales lot January corporation’s served for M & M answer on 1997, and filed the February 11. Eckles was decided March. The Court expressly provided holding only prospectively, that its have effect beginning opinion appears “on and after the date that this corporation advance sheets.” Id. Without concession, that would applied, left without an answer. Had Eckles then whether the answer was sufficient in its content under OCGA 9-11- judicially intеrpreted, cognizable it would not be an answer at giving law and the trial court would have been correct not it that layman’s “[a] legal representation stature. Eckles held that in a court ‘person’ separate corporate entity of record of another in the form of a proscribed.” only permitted is . . . rep- & M would to be attorney. resented a licensed points up problem post- This case a notification exist Ogltree Eckles, if the summons form used was served for vogue. hereby & Homes is still It defendant, tells the ‘Youare summoned and to file with the Clerk of said court and serve attorney, upon which ... an answer to the Plaintiff’s corporate you. upon defend- .”It does not tell a . . is herewith served attorney and file an answer on its behalf licensed can ant that corporations myriad litigation. represent of small it in the marketplace could that not even an officer would not know represent respond, se in a court of law. itself and that it could judg- impression opinion and that the verdict 2. The leaves the damages separate only against M & M. The ment were puni- attorney and added each of the two defendants fees separate judgments Likewise, were M & M. tive accordingly. entered joins special Judge in this Ruffin
I am authorized to state concurrence. 31, 1998. Burns,
Joel D. for appellee. Fierman,
Martin L. THE
A98A0932. CASILLAS v. STATE. Blackburn, Judge. involuntary manslaughter Joe M. Casillas was convicted of during possession of a crime in connec- of a firearm the commission Wright. appeals, shooting He tion with the death of Martin Leonard asserting below, discussed we numerous errors. For the reasons affirm. the evidence at
Viewed most favorable to the following. Timothy Corporals trial revealed the Lawler Ted Hatch Department dispatched were the Savannah Police reported shooting. scene, Hatch saw Casil- scene of a At the lying *4 victim, vehicles, las between twо eyebrows. ground Casillas told with a bullet wound between his upstairs drinking Henry Ruiz, friend, Hatch that had been he and Wright “just grabbed gun him- and shot beer with dragged Ruiz the victim self in the head.” down the stairs and “wеre said that he and Casillas attempt hospi- going to take him to the they changed mind and tal, other, their but that for some reason or police.” called the Corporal Hatch that defendant state to Lawler heard gun in the head.” Lawler
“the victim had taken the and shot himself Henry upstairs apartment Ruiz and found went into the