Case Information

*1 Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ January 25, 2017 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16A1795. WANDA CORLEY HAIGHT et al. v. TRANSCONTINENTAL

GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC.

Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company, LLC, which plans to build a natural gas pipeline in north Georgia, sued multiple parties who own property in the pipeline’s proposed path for access to their land to conduct civil, environmental, and cultural-resource surveys required by federal law. Transcontinental later filed a motion for a preliminary injunction allowing it temporary access to the properties. Following a hearing, the trial court granted Transcontinental’s motion. The court’s order provided that “[t]his interlocutory relief shall expire 180 days from the date of this order, Monday, April 4, 2016.” The City of Atlanta, one of the defendants, filed a motion to stay enforcement of the preliminary injunction pending an appeal, but the trial court denied that motion.

Five of the defendants (collectively, “the Corleys”) filed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court indicating their wish to appeal the orders granting Transcontinental’s preliminary injunction and denying the City’s request for a stay. The appeal was docketed in the Supreme Court on March 3, 2016. Transcontinental filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the appeal was moot because the surveys had been completed and the injunction order had expired by its own terms. The Corleys responded that the appeal was not moot because they had been harmed by Transcontinental’s intrusion onto their land, Transcontinental could seek additional surveys in the future, and the issues presented here were capable of repetition yet evaded review.

The Supreme Court did not expressly rule on Transcontinental’s motion to *2 dismiss. Instead, on April 26, 2016, that Court entered an order transferring the case here on the ground that subject-matter jurisdiction lies in this Court. The Supreme Court’s transfer order provides, in relevant part:

Appellants filed a notice of appeal directed to this Court, asserting that jurisdiction was proper in this Court pursuant to its jurisdiction over equity cases. However, as the injunction issue is now moot , and the only claims still pending on appeal implicate the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals, not this Court, this appeal hereby is transferred to the Court of Appeals[.]

(Emphasis supplied.)

We now address Transcontinental’s motion to dismiss. Despite the Corleys’ arguments that the appeal is not moot, the Supreme Court resolved this issue adversely to them. “[T]he law of the case rule makes any ruling by the Supreme Court binding in all subsequent proceedings in that case in the lower courts.” Shadix v. Carroll County , 274 Ga. 560, 562 (1) (554 SE2d 465) (2001) (punctuation and footnote omitted). “It is apodictic that Georgia’s appellate courts are required to adhere to the law of the case rule in all matters which they consider.” Security Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. Clark , 273 Ga. 44, 46 (1) (535 SE2d 234) (2000). We are bound by the Supreme Court’s ruling that “the injunction issue is now moot.” The only other issue on appeal appears to be the City’s request for a stay of the injunction pending appeal, which likewise is moot. ^[1]

Pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-48 (b) (3), an appeal will be dismissed if the question presented has become moot. Accordingly, Transcontinental’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

*3 Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 01/25/2017 I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk.

[1] In their appellate briefing, the Corleys claim that Transcontinental damaged their land while conducting its surveys. But the Corleys have not asserted a claim for damages, and the trial court has made no ruling respecting damages. Accordingly, the issue of damages is not before us.