THI RD DI VI SI ON

BA RNES, P. J.

, BOGGS and BRA NCH, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s /

M ar ch 26, 2015



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 4 A2 10 8

. VEATCH v. AURORA LOAN SERVICES, LLC et al

.

B R A N C H , J u d g e.

In a p rev i ou s act i o n to q u i et t i t l e, J o h n M

. Veat ch (“ Veat c h ” o r t h e “ Veat ch

Es t at e”)

, a c ting a s the a dm in i s t rat o r o f h is fat h er’ s es t at e, s u cces s fu l l y es t ab l i s h ed t h at

s o m eo n e h ad fo rg ed t wo d e e d s i n o r d er t o tran s fer es tat e p ro p ert y t o a pers o n wh o

u s ed t h e pro pert y t o secu re a $ 1 8 7 ,7 0 0 l o an

. Th e t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci s i on t o q u i et t i t l e

was affi rm ed b y t h e Su p rem e Co u rt

. Au r o r a Lo a n S vcs

. v. Vea t ch

, 2 88 Ga. 8 0 8

, 8 0 9

(7 1 0 SE2 d 7 4 4 ) (2 0 1 1 ). W h i l e t h e q u i et t i t l e act io n was p en d i n g , Au ro ra Lo an

Serv i ces , LLC, wi t h th e as s is t an ce o f M cCal l a Ray m er, LLC, reco rd ed in t he Fu l t o n

Co u n t y p ro p ert y reco rd s an as s i g n m en t t o Au ro ra o f t h e s ecu red p art y ’ s i n t eres t i n t h e

$ 1 8 7 ,7 0 0 lo an

. A ft er t h e Su p rem e Co u rt u p h el d t h e d eci s io n t o qu i et t i t l e t o t h e

p ro p ert y i n t h e es t at e, Veat ch s u ed Au ro ra an d M cCal l a, as s ert i n g t h at by reco rd i n gt h e as s i gn m e n t

, t h ey h ad s l an d ered t h e t i t l e o f t h e real p ro pert y an d wro n g fu l l y

i n t erfered wi t h t h e es tat e’ s p ro p ert y ri g h t s

. Th e tri al co u rt g ran t ed s u m m ary ju d g m en t

t o t he defen d an t s, an d Veat ch ap p eal s

. W e affi rm b ecau s e Veat ch h as fai l ed t o p res en t

an y ev i d en ce t o es t ab l i s h s p eci al d am ag es

.

“ Su m m ary ju d g m en t i s pro p er wh en th ere i s n o g en u i n e i s su e of m at eri al fact

an d t h e m o v an t is en t i t led t o ju dg m en t as a m at ter o f l aw.” W a l ker v. Gwi n n et t Ho s

p.

S ys t em , 2 6 3 Ga. A p p

. 5 5 4

, 5 5 5 (5 8 8 SE2 d 4 4 1 ) (2 0 0 3) (ci t a t i o n s an d pu n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ). A t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f s u m m ary ju d g m en t i s rev i ewed d e no v o o n ap p eal

,

c o n s t ru i n g t he ev id en ce i n t h e l i g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e n o nm o v an t

. E th r i d g e v

.

Da vi s , 2 4 3 Ga. Ap p

. 11

, 1 2 (5 3 0 SE2 d 4 7 7 ) (2 0 0 0 ). “ If t h ere is no ev id en ce su ffi ci en t

t o creat e a g en u in e i s s ue as t o an y es s en t i al el em e n t o f p l a i n ti ff’ s cl ai m , t hat cl ai m

t u m b l e s l i k e a h ou s e o f card s

. Al l of t h e o t h er d i s p ut es o f fact are ren d ered

i m m at eri al .” La u ’s Co r

p

. v. H a s ki ns , 2 61 G a. 4 9 1 (4 05 SE2 d 4 7 4 ) (1 9 9 1 ) (ci t at i o n

o m it t ed ).

Th e fact s , s u p pl em en t ed as s h o wn , are s et o u t i n t he Su p rem e Co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n

affi rm in g t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er s t ri k i n g t h e t wo fo rg ed d eed s fro m t h e Fu l t o n Co u n t y

Reco rd s an d q u i et i ng t i t le t o t h e p ro pert y i n t he es tat e:

2El s i e Veat ch o wn ed t h e s u b ject p ro pert y un t i l h er d eat h in 1 9 7 4 ; her s ol e

h ei r was R a ym o n d W es l ey Veat ch

, J r., Veat ch ’ s fat h er, wh o di ed o n

M arch 2 0

, 2 0 0 6. A ft er h i s d eat h

, t wo fo rg ed d eed s w ere reco rd ed i n th e

Fu l t on Co u n t y

d eed reco rd s , p u rp o rt in g t o co n v ey ti t l e t o t h e p r o p e r t y

t o An t o n i o Si m

p so n

. O n e fo rg ed deed was s t y l ed “ Qu i tcl ai m Deed ,”

p u rp o rt ed ly ex ecu t ed o n M ay 1 9

, 2 00 6 by El s i e Veat ch

, wh o h ad t h en

b een d ead fo r 3 2 y ears ; t hi s p u rp o rt ed d eed was reco rd ed on Oct o b er 1 7

, 2 0 0 6

. Th e o t h er p u rp o rt ed d eed was s t y l ed “ Ex ecu t o rs D eed ,” an d w as

p u rp o r t e d l y e x ecu t ed b y Ray m o n d W es l ey Veat ch

, J r., on M arch 1 5

, 2 0 0 6

, a d at e on w h ich h e l ay i n a c o m a; i t was reco rd ed o n No v em b er

6

, 2 0 0 6

. Aft er t h es e fo rg ed d eed s we r e e x ecu t ed an d reco rd ed

, a

warran t y deed p u rp o rt ed l y fro m An t o n i o Si m p s o n t o Darry l M at t h ews

was reco rd ed o n N o v em b er 8

, 20 0 6

. [In M ay 2 0 0 7 ,] M at th ews t h en

ex e cu t ed a s ecu ri ty d eed i n fav o r o f [M E RS as t h e n o m in ee o f] Fi rs t

M ag n u s Fi nan ci al Co rp o rat i o n i n co n n ect i on wi t h a l o an fo r $ 1 8 7,5 0 0

. [On No v em

b er 1, 2 0 07

, t ] h e s ecu ri t y d eed was

. . . as s i g n ed t o Au ro ra[,

b u t t h e as si g nm en t was n o t reco rd ed u n t i l Ap ri l 9 , 2 0 0 9

. ]

[M ean wh i l e, o ] n Sep t em

b er 5

, 2 0 0 7

, aft er Veat ch d i s co v ered act i v i t y o n

t h e p ro p ert y an d ap p l i ed fo r, an d was g ran t ed

, l et t ers o f ad m i n is trat i o n

o f t h e es t at e o f Ray m o n d W es l ey Veat ch

, J r. , h e f i l e d i n t h e Fu l t o n

Co u nt y l an d reco r d s a n affi dav i t st at i n g t h at t h e Ex ecu t o r’ s an d

Qu i t cl ai m d eed s were fal s e. [O n Sep t em b er 18

, 20 0 8

, h ] e th en fi l ed i n

t h e s u p eri o r co u rt [ a ] p et i t i o n t o q u i et t i t l e [s eek i n g t o can cel t h e t wo

fo rg ed d e e d s , t h e d eed t o M at t h ews , an d th e M E RS s ecu ri t y d eed ;

Veat ch al so fi led a l i s p en d en s reg ard i n g t h e s u b j ect p ro p ert y ] . OCGA

§ 2 3 -3 -4 0 et s eq

. [Al t h ou g h Au ro ra i n i t i al l y was n o t n am ed as a p art y t o

3t h e q u iet t i tl e act i o n , A uro ra was ad ded as a d efen d an t o n Ap ri l 1

, 2 0 0 9 ;

n i n e d ay s l at er, Au ro ra reco rd ed t h e as s i g n m en t o f t he secu ri t y d eed

fro m M ERS, wh i ch was d raft ed by M cCal l a.] T he t ri al co urt ap p oi n ted

a Sp eci al M as t er wh o co n cl u d ed t h at Au ro ra was a b o n a fi de p u rch as er

fo r v al ue

. S e e R o o

p Gr o cer y Co

. v. Gen t r

y , 1 9 5 Ga. 7 36

, 7 4 5 (1 ) (2 5

SE2 d 7 0 5 ) (1 9 43 ). Ho wev er, t h e t ri al co u rt d i s ag reed

, fi n d i n g th at t h ere

was reco rd n o t i ce t h at t h e fo rg ed d eed s were frau d u l en t

, an d t h at in an y

ev en t , a fo rg ed d eed i s a n u l l i t y an d can n o t co n vey

t i tl e.

Au r or a Lo a n S

vcs

. , 2 8 8 Ga. at 80 9

. On M arch 18

, 20 1 1

, t h e Su p rem e Co urt affi rm ed

t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s deci si o n qu iet i n g ti t le i n t h e es tat e on t h e g ro u n d t hat a fo rg ed d eed

i s a n u l l i t y an d t h erefo re t h e tri al co u rt d id n ot err b y q u i et in g t i t l e t o th e p ro p ert y in

t h e es t at e u n en cu m

b ered b y t h e s ecu ri t y d eed h el d b y Au ro ra. Id

. Aft er t h e Su p rem e

Co u rt ’ s d eci si o n, Veat ch s o l d th e s u b j ect p ro p ert y

fo r $ 1 8,0 0 0

.

On e y ear l at er, Veat ch fi l ed s u it ag ai n s t Au ro ra an d M cCal la al l eg i n g s l an d er

o f t it l e an d i n t erferen ce wi th p ro p ert y ri g h ts

, s eek i n g dam ag es , p un i ti v e d am ag es , an d

at t o rn ey fees an d ex p en ses

. Veat ch al l eg ed th at as a res u lt o f t h e d efen d an t s ’ act i o n s ,

Veat ch was u n ab l e t o co n vey cl ear t i t l e t o t h e p ro p ert y fro m 2 0 0 7 t h ro u g h wh en t h e

Su p rem e Co u rt affi rm ed t he d eci s i o n t o q ui et t it l e an d t h at t h e d efen d an t s t h erefo re

s h o u ld b e l i ab l e fo r t h e l o s s i n v al u e o f t h e p ro p ert y d u ri n g t h at t i m e. Veat ch m o v ed

fo r p art i al s u m

m ary ju dg m en t on t h e i s s u e of l i ab il i t y , an d t h e d efen d an t s m o v ed fo r

4s u m

m ary ju d g m en t o n al l of Veat ch ’ s cl ai m s

. In Decem ber 2 0 1 3

, th e tri a l c o u r t

g ran t ed s u m

m ary ju d g m en t i n fav o r o f Au ro ra an d M cCal l a. Veat ch n o w ap p eal s

.

1

. V e a t ch co n t en d s th e t ri al co u rt erred by g ran t i n g s u m m ary ju d g m en t t o

Au ro ra an d McCal la o n h i s cl ai m o f s l a n der o f t i t l e. 1 Veat ch rai s ed t h e cl ai m o f

s l an d er o f t i t l e as fo l l o ws :

By reco rd i n g t h e Au ro ra As s i g n m en t o n t h e Fu l t o n Co u n t y Reco rd s ,

t h e n c o n s ci o u s l y act i n g t o m ai n t ai n t h e ex is t en ce o f t h e i nv al i d

en cu m b ran ce o n t h e Fu l t o n Co u n t y Reco rd s, Defen d an ts k n o wi n g l y an d

v o l u n t ari l y p u b l i s h ed fal s e an d d efam at o ry w o rd s ag ai n st t he V eat ch

Es t at e’ s t i t l e t o t h e Veat ch Pro p ert y

.

Veat ch fu rt h er al l eg ed t h at as a res u l t

, t h e e s t a t e c o u l d n o t co n v ey cl ear ti t l e t o t h e

s u b ject p ro p ert y , o r ev en at t em p t t o s el l i t, u n t i l aft er th e Su prem e Co urt affi rm ed t h e

t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n t o q u i et t i tl e. Veat ch cl ai m ed th at as a res u l t

, t h e es t at e s u ffered

s p eci al d am ag es “ b y

t h e l o s s i n v al u e o f t h e s l an d ered Veat ch Pro p ert y .”

“ Th e o wn er o f an y es t at e i n lan d s m ay b r i n g an act i on fo r l ib el o u s o r

s l an d ero u s wo rd s wh i ch fal s e l y a n d m al i ci o u sl y i m p u gn hi s t i t l e i f an y d am ag e

accru es t o h i m t h erefr o m

. ” O C G A § 5 1 -9 -1 1

. “ In o rd er t o s u s tai n an act i o n o f t h i s

1 Veat ch d o es n o t ch al l en g e t he tri al co u rt ’ s g ran t of s u m m ary ju d g m e n t o n
Veat ch ’ s cl ai m o f i nt erferen ce wi t h pro p ert y , an d t h erefo re t h at cl a i m i s n o t b efo re

u s

.

5k i n d

, t he p l ai n ti ff m u st al l eg e an d p ro v e t h e u t t eri n g an d p ub l is h i n g of t h e s lan d ero u s

wo rd s ; th at t h ey were fal s e; t h at t h ey were m a l i c i o u s; th at h e s u s t ai n ed s p eci al

d am ag e t h ereb y ; an d t h at h e p o s s es s ed an es t at e i n th e p ro p ert y s lan d ered .” La t so n

v. Bo az , 2 7 8 Ga. 1 1 3, 11 4 (5 98 SE2 d 4 8 5) (2 0 0 4 ) (ci t at i o n s an d p u nct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

Pret erm it t i n g an al y s i s o f t h e o t h er el em en t s o f p ro o f, t h i s cas e i s co n t ro l l ed by

Veat ch ’ s fai l u re t o rai s e an i s s u e o f fact reg ard i n g s p eci al d am a g e s

. A p l ai n t i ff

as s ert i n g a s lan d er of t it l e cl ai m i s en ti t led to “ o n l y s uch s p eci al d am ag es as h e

act u al l y s u s t ai n ed as a co n s eq u en ce o f t h e wro n gfu l act s , wh i ch d am ag es m u s t b e

p l ed an d p ro v en wi th p art i cu l ari t y .” S a n der s v. Br o wn , 2 5 7 Ga. Ap p

. 5 6 6, 56 8 (5 7 1

S E2 d 5 3 2 ) (2 0 0 2 ). “ Sp eci al d am ag es are t h os e wh i ch act u al ly fl o w fro m a t o rt i o u s

act .” OCGA § 51 -1 2 -2 (b ). Gen e ral i zed al l eg at i o n s of d am ag es are i ns u ffi ci en t to

es t ab l i s h s p eci al d am ag es

. Hi cks v. McLa i n ’s B ld g. Ma ter i a l

s , 2 09 Ga. Ap p. 1 9 1

, 1 9 2

(1 ) (4 33 SE2 d 1 14 ) (1 9 9 3 ). Su m m ary ju dg m en t i n fav o r o f a d efen dan t i n a s l an d er

o f t i t l e act i o n wi l l be affi rm ed wh en t h e ap p el lan t fai l s t o p res en t p ro o f o f s p e c i a l

d am ag es i n res p on s e t o a m o t i o n fo r s um m ary ju d g m en t t h at p o i n t s o u t t h e ab s en ce

o f s u ch ev i d en ce i n th e ap p el lan t ’ s cas e. Gi l es v. S wi mmer , 2 9 0 Ga. 6 5 0

, 6 5 2 (2 ) (7 2 5

SE2 d 2 2 0) (2 0 1 2) (a s l an d er o f t i t l e cas e).

6In t h ei r m o t i o n s fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t, t h e ap p el l ees cl ai m ed t h at t h ere was

n o ev i d en ce o f s peci al d am ag es t o s u p p ort V eat ch ’ s cl ai m

. In res p o n s e, Veat ch p o i n t s

t o hi s v eri fi ed an s wers t o i n t erro g at o ri es i n w h i ch h e m ad e th e fo l lo wi n g as s ert i on s

o f dam ag e res u l t i n g fro m t h e al l eg ed s l an der o f t i t l e: (1 ) t he es t at e was un ab l e t o t ak e

act i on to s el l th e p ro p ert y b efo re M arch 1 8

, 2 01 1

, t h e d at e o f t h e Su p rem e Co urt ’ s

d eci s i o n i n t he q u i et t i t l e act i on ; (2 ) b eg i n n i n g i n Ju n e 20 1 1

, t he es tat e t oo k s t ep s to

s el l th e p ro p ert y an d recei v ed t w o offers b efo re en t eri n g i n to an ag reem en t t o s el l o n

Au g u s t 2 9 , 2 01 1 fo r a p ri ce o f $ 1 8 ,0 0 0 ; (3 ) t h e p ri ce o b tai n ed was “ co ns i s t en t wi th

o t h er nearb y l i s t i n g s ”; an d (4 ) Veat ch accep t ed t h at pri ce bas ed o n an ev al uat i o n o f

t h e d ep res s ed m ark et co n di ti o n s an d t h e u n l ik el i h o o d t h at co n di t i o n s wo u l d i m p ro v e

i n t h e “ fo res eeab l e fu t u re.” In h is b ri efs

, Veat ch s u g g es ts th at t h e es t at e was d am ag ed

b y th e d i fferen ce in t he am o u n t o f t h e 2 0 0 7 l o an , $ 1 8 7

, 7 0 0

, t h at w as o b t ai n ed b as ed

o n th e fo rg ed d eed s , an d t h e u l t i m at e pri ce t h at Veat ch w as a b l e t o o b t ai n fo r t h e

p ro p er t y i n 2 0 1 1

, $ 1 8 ,0 0 0

. T h i s ev i d en ce is i n s u ffi ci en t t o rai s e an is s u e o f fact

reg ard i n g s p eci al d am ag es

.

Fi rs t

, a cl ai m o f s l a n d e r o f t i t l e “ accru es wh en t h e fal s e, s l an d ero u s , an d

m al i ci ou s wo rd s i m

pu g n i ng th e t i t l e o f t h e p ers on ’ s l an d are fi rs t p u b l i s hed

, cau s i n g

s p eci al d am ag es .” Sa n d

er s , 25 7 Ga. Ap p. at 5 6 7 -5 6 8 (ci t at i o n o m it t ed ). T h u s , t h e

7t i m e fram e fo r as s es s i n g d am ag es ru n s fro m A p ri l 9

, 2 0 0 9

, t h e d at e th e a s s i g n m en t

was reco rd ed

, t o M arch 18

, 2 0 1 1

, t h e d at e o f t h e Su p rem e Co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n.

Ac co rd i ng l y , t h e am o u n t o f t he l o an o bt ai ned i n M ay 2 0 0 7 i s n o t rel ev an t t o a

d et erm i n at i o n o f d am ag es

. Seco n d

, V eat ch h as n o t b ro u g h t fo rt h an y fact s reg ard i n g

t h e v al u e o f t h e p ro pert y at an y t i m e b et ween Ap ri l 2 0 0 9 an d M arch 2 0 1 1 n o r s h o wn

h o w t h e v al ue o f t he p r o p ert y d u ri n g t h at p eri od s u ffered fro m t h e fact t h at t h e

rel ev an t as s i g n m en t was reco rd ed

. Th is u tt er fai lu re t o s h o w s p eci fi c fi g u res to

s u p p ort t h e cl ai m o f d am ag es i s fat al t o th e c l ai m o f s lan d er o f t i t le. Ha r mo n v.

Cu n a r d , 1 9 0 Ga. Ap p . 1 9 (3 7 8 SE2 d 3 5 1 ) (1 9 89 ); Gi l es , 2 9 0 Ga. at 6 5 2-6 5 3 (2 ). In

H a r m o n , t h e p l ai n t i ff al l eg ed sl an d er o f t i t l e an d as s ert ed t h at b y reco rd i n g a f a l s e

l i en o n h er p ro p er t y , t he d efen d an t s h ad “ p rev en t ed h er fro m o b tai n i n g fu nd s

n eces s ary t o co m

pl et e h er h o u s e an d p rev en t ed h er fro m s el l i n g h er h o u s e, wi t h o ut

o fferi n g s p eci f i c f i g ur es fo r t h e dam a g e al leg ed l y su ffered

. ” Id

. at 2 0 (em p h as i s

s u p p li ed ). Th i s Co u rt n o t ed t h at d uri n g t h e t ri al

, fo l l o wi n g wh i ch t h e ju ry ret u rn ed a

ju d g m en t i n her fav o r, t h e p l ai nt i ff d i d n o t “ t es t i fy t o o r ot h erwi s e p ro v e an y s p eci al

d am ag es act u al l y s us t ai n ed i n t h i s reg ard .” Id

. Acco rd i n g l y , t h i s Co urt affi rm ed t h e

t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f ju d g m en t n o t wi th s t an d i n g t h e v erd i ct

. Id

. Here, Veat ch fai l ed to

o ffer an y s p eci fi c fi g u res t o s h o w s p eci al d am ag e res u l ti n g fro m t h e d efen d an t s ’

8act i on s at t h e rel ev an t t im es

. Th u s, t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t err b y gran t i n g s u m m ary

ju d g m en t o n t h e cl ai m o f s l an der o f t i t le. See, e.g ., M & M Mt g

. Co

. v. G r a n t vi l l e

Mi l l

, 3 0 2 Ga. Ap p

. 4 6

, 5 0 (3 ) (6 9 0 SE2 d 6 3 0 ) (2 0 1 0 ) (“ G en eral ev i d en ce t h at t h e l i en

h i n d ered [p art y ’ s ] ab il i t y t o o b t ai n a l o an was al s o i n s u ffi ci en t to es t ab l i s h s p eci al

d am ag es .”) (ci t at i o n s o m it t ed ); B e l l v

. K i n g

, Ph i p p s & As s o c., P.C.

, 1 7 6 Ga. Ap p.

7 0 2

, 70 4 (1 ) (b ) (3 3 7 SE2 d 3 6 4 ) (1 9 8 5 ) (ev i d en ce o f a d ecl i n e i n p ro p ert y v al u e o v er

t h e rel ev an t p eri o d o f t i m e is i n s uffi ci en t wi th ou t ev i den ce t h at t h e v al u e o f t h e

p ro p ert y was affect ed by

t h e al l eg ed l y

s lan d ero u s l i en ).

Ve a t c h ’s as s ert i o n t h at h e was d am ag ed b y h av in g t o l it i gat e t h e q u i et t i t l e

act i on i s al s o wi t h o ut m eri t

. Co s t s o f l i t i gat i o n an d at to rn ey fees “ d o n o t co n s t i t u t e

t h e sp eci al d am ag es n eces s ary t o s u p p o rt [a cl ai m o f s l an d er o f t it l e.] ” Sa n d er s , 2 5 7

Ga. Ap p

. at 5 68 (ci t at i o n o m i t t ed ); M & M Mt g

. , 3 0 2 Ga. Ap p

. at 50 (3 ) (at to rn ey fees

n eces s ary t o rem o v e al l eg ed l y s l an d ero u s l i en i n p ri o r pro ceed i n g d i d no t co n s t i t u t e

s p eci al d am ag es ); Bel l , 1 7 6 Ga. Ap p . at 7 0 4 (“ Th e ex p en s es o f d efen d i ng a l aws u i t

d o n o t co n s t i t u t e s p eci al d am ag es

. ”) (ci tat i o n o m i t t ed ).

Becau s e Veat ch fai l ed t o p res en t an y ev i d en ce o f s p eci al dam ag es i n res p o n s e

t o t h e m o t i o n s fo r s u m

m ary ju d g m en t

, th e t ri al co u rt co rrect l y g ra n t e d s u m m ary

ju d g m en t o n Veat ch ’ s cl ai m o f s l an d er o f t i t l e.

92

. Becau se Veat ch ’ s cl a i m s fo r pu n it i ve d am ag es an d at t o rn ey fees are

d eri v at i v e o f h i s cl ai m fo r s l an d er o f t i t l e, t h e t ri al co u rt al s o d i d no t err b y g ran t i n g

s u m m ary ju d g m en t o n t ho s e cl ai m s

. See Gr een v. Fl an a g a n , 31 7 Ga. Ap p

. 1 5 2

, 1 5 6

(1 ) (7 3 0 SE2 d 1 6 1 ) ( 2 0 12 ); Ca n t o n Pl a z a v. Reg i on s Ba nk

, 3 1 5 Ga. Ap p

. 3 0 3

, 3 0 8

(1 ) (b ) (7 3 2 SE2 d 4 4 9) (2 01 2 ).

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Ba r nes , P. J., a n d

Bo gg s

, J., co n cu r

.

10