Quarterman v. Memorial Medical CenterQuarterman v. Memorial Medical Center
In 1980, appellant brought suit against the appellees. All three defendants were granted summary judgment in 1981. In
Quarterman v. Quarterman,
1. The question of recusal is controlled adversely to appellant by
Stevens v. Morris Communications Corp.,
2. The basis of appellant’s petition to vacate the 1981 judgments is that the trial court erroneously failed to grant him a continuance of the summary judgment hearing. Pleadings from the former case, introduced into the record of this case, show that the same contention was the basis of appellant’s 1981 motion to set aside the summary judgments, a motion which was decided adversely to appellant.
“OCGA § 9-12-40 . . . provides that ‘(a) judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction shall be conclusive between the same parties and their privies as to all matters put in issue or which under the
*93
rules of law might have been put in issue in the cause wherein the judgment was rendered until the judgment is reversed or set aside.’ The doctrine of res judicata applies even where the earlier judgment was a default judgment or a summary adjudication. [Cit.]”
Morgan v. Dept. of Offender Rehabilitation,
Appellant’s sole argument here is that since this court did not affirm the denial of his 1981 motion to set aside, that judgment has no res judicata effect. Appellant seems to have misread the statute: it does not say that a judgment is conclusive only when affirmed, but that it is conclusive until it is “reversed or set aside.” The order denying appellant’s 1981 motion to set aside, a motion based on the same theory and facts as appellant’s 1984 petition in equity, has not been reversed or set aside and is conclusive on the issues raised in this case. Summary judgment for appellees was proper.
Judgments affirmed.