FOURTH D I VI SI ON

DI LLA R D, C. J.

, D OYLE, P. J.

, and M ERCI ER, J.

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 l s .us /r ule s

M ay 1, 2018



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 8 A0 19 3 . LANGLEY v . M P SPRING LAKE, LLC.

D I LLA R D , Ch i ef J u d g e.

Pam el a Lan g l ey ap p eal s fro m t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f s u m m ary ju d g m en t in

fav o r o f M P Sp ri n g Lak e, L LC (“ Sp ri n g Lak e”) on h er s u i t fo r p rem i s es l i ab i l i t y d u e

t o p ers o n al i n

ju ri es sh e s u s t ai ned as a t en an t o f an ap art m en t co m p l ex t h at

, a t t h e

t i m e, was o wn ed b y Sp ri n g Lak e. Lan g l ey ’ s s o l e arg u m en t o n ap p eal i s t h at t h e t ri al

co u rt erred i n g ran t i n g s u m m ary ju d g m en t t o Sp ri n g L ak e aft er co n cl u d in g t h at h er

l eas e s ho r t e n e d t h e t i m e t o b ri n g p ers o n al -i n ju ry act i o n s ag ai n s t t h e ap art m en t

co m p l ex fro m t wo y ears t o o n e y ear. Fo r t h e reas o n s s et fo rt h i n fr a , we affi rm

.Vi ewed i n t h e li g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o L an g l ey ( i .e. , th e n on m o v i n g part y ), 1 t h e

r e c o r d s h o ws s h e fi l ed s u i t ag ai n s t Sp ri n g Lak e on M arch 3

, 2 01 6

, al l eg i n g t h at o n

M arch 3

, 2 0 1 4

, wh i le a l awfu l t en an t o f Sp ri n g Lak e Ap art m en t s i n M orro w, G eo rg i a,

s h e fel l i n a co m

m o n area of t h e co m

p l ex wh en h er fo ot g o t cau g h t a n d s l i d o n a

cru m b li n g p ort i o n o f cu rb

. Sh e l a t er m ad e cl ai m s o f n eg l i gen ce an d n eg li g en ce p er

s e d u e t o S p ri n g Lak e’ s al l eg ed fai lu re t o rep ai r t h e cu rb d es pi t e b ei ng aware o f i t s

d i s rep ai r.

Sp ri ng Lak e as s ert ed

, as o n e o f i t s defen s es , t h at Lan g ley ’ s cl ai m s were b arred

b y a co n tract u al l i m i t at i o n p eri o d co n t ai n ed wi t h i n her l eas e. Sp ri n g Lak e t h en m o v ed

fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t o n t h i s b as i s , 2 arg u i n g t h at

, b ecau s e Lan g l ey ’ s leas e co n t ai n ed

a o ne-y ear l i m it at i o n p eri o d fo r l eg al act i o n s an d s h e fi l ed h er c o m p l a i n t t wo y ears

aft er t h e i n

j u ry o ccu rred

, h er cl ai m was t i m e-b arred

. M o re sp eci fi cal l y , Sp ri n g Lak e

1 S ee, e.g

. , Ma t

s o n v. Ba yvi ew Lo a n S

r v., LLC

, 3 39 Ga. A p p

. 8 90

, 8 9 0 (7 9 5

SE2 d 1 9 5) (2 0 1 6).

2 Sp ri n g Lak e al s o as s ert ed

, al t ern at i v el y , t h at Lan g l ey ’ s cl ai m s were b arred by

t h e s t at ut e o f l i m i t at i o n an d h er fai l u re to perfect s erv i ce wi t h i n t h e li m i tat i o n p eri o d

o r a reas on ab l e t i m e t h ereaft er. Sp ri n g Lak e ab an do n ed t h i s al t ern at i v e g ro u n d in

ex ch an g e fo r Lan g l ey wai v in g h er ri g ht t o ren ewal u n d e r OCGA § 9 -2 -6 1

. As a

res u l t, t h i s al t ern at i v e arg um en t i s n o t at i ss u e o n ap p eal

.

2arg u ed t h at b ecau s e Lan g ley ’ s cl ai m s accru ed o n M arch 3, 2 0 1 4

, w h en s h e fel l

, s h e

was req u ired b y

h er l eas e t o fi l e s u i t o n o r b efo re M arch 3 , 2 0 1 5

.

Th e l eas e at i s s u e was en t ered i n t o o n May 7

, 2 01 3

, wi t h an effect i v e p eri o d

o f J u n e 5

, 2 01 3

, t o J un e 4

, 2 0 1 4

. In t he t h i rt y -t h i rd p arag rap h o f t h e l eas e, t h e

ag reem en t p ro v id es :

Li m i t at i o n o n Act i o ns

. To t h e ex t en t al l o w ed by l aw, Res i d en t al s o

ag rees an d u n d ers t an d s t h a t an y leg al act i o n ag ai n s t M an ag em en t o r

Own er m u st b e i n s t i t u t ed wi t h i n o n e y ear o f t h e d at e an y cl ai m or cau s e

o f act i o n ari s es an d t h at an y act i o n fi l ed aft er on e y ear fro m su ch d a t e

s h al l b e t i m e b arred as a m at t er o f l aw.

In res p o n s e t o Sp ri n g Lak e’ s m ot i o n fo r s um m ary ju d g m en t

, Lan g l ey arg u ed

t h at (1 ) t h e l i m i t at i o n -o n -act i o n s cl au s e was t o o am b i g u ou s t o b e en fo rceab l e; (2 ) t h e

cl au s e was o n l y ap p l i cab l e t o act i o n s t h at aro s e fro m t he co n t r a c t i t s el f, n o t an

u n rel at ed p ers on al -i n

ju ry act i o n ; (3 ) Sp ri ng L ak e was es t o p p ed fro m rel y i n g u p o n t h e

p ro v is i o n du e t o st at em en t s m ad e b y rep res en t at i v es o f Sp ri n g Lak e’ s i ns u r a nce

carri er b o t h b efo re an d a f t er t h e ex p i rat io n o f t h e o n e-y ear p eri o d ; an d (4 ) i t was

fu n d am en t al l y u n fai r t o en fo rce t h e cl au s e b ecau s e n ei t h er p art y was ev en aware o f

i t s ex i s t en ce.

3Th e t ri al co u rt reject ed L an g l ey ’ s arg u m en t s an d g ran ted Sp ri n g Lak e’ s m o t i o n

fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t, co n cl u d i n g t h at t h e pro v i si o n was en fo rceab l e. Sp eci fi cal l y ,

t h e co u rt fo u n d t h at Lan gl ey ’ s pers o n al -i n ju ry cl ai m s were t im e-b arred b ecau s e s h e

file d s u i t aft er t h e ex p i rat i o n o f th e on e-y ear co n t ract u al l im i t at io n p eri od

. T hi s ap p eal

fo l l o w s

.

Su m m ary ju d g m en t i s , o f co u rs e, p ro p er wh en “ t here i s n o g en u in e i s s u e as to

an y m at eri al fact an d

. . . t h e m o v i n g p art y i s en t it l ed t o a j u d gm en t as a m at t er o f

l aw[.] ” 3 An d we rev i ew a g ran t o r den i al o f s u m m ary ju d g m en t d

e n o vo , co n s t ru i n g

“ t h e ev i d en ce i n t h e l i g ht m os t fav o rab l e t o t h e n o n m o v an t .” 4 W i t h t h es e g u i d i n g

p ri n ci p l es i n m i n d , we wi l l n o w ad d res s Lan g l ey ’ s co n t en t i o n o n ap p eal

.

Lan g l ey arg u es t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s co n cl us i o n i s erro n eo u s b ecau s e a co n t ract u al

l i m i t a t i o n peri o d sh o u ld n o t ap p l y t o cl ai m s th at d o no t ari s e o u t of t h e ag reem en t

.

Sh e co n t en d s t h e s u b

ject cl au s e “ m ay b e ‘ al l -i ncl u s i v e’ fo r c a u s e s o f act i on b as ed

u p o n t h e l eas e co nt ract

, b u t i t i s o v e rl y b ro ad an d i m p ro p er t o i n terp ret t h e l eas e

co n tra c t cl au s e as l i m i t i ng an act i o n d eri ved s o l el y fro m a s t at ut o ry ri g ht u n rel at ed

t o t he co n t ract .”

3 OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 6 (c); a cco r d Ma t s o n , 3 3 9 Ga. Ap p . at 8 90

.

4 Ma t s o n , 3 3 9 Ga. Ap p . at 8 9 0.

4In co n si d eri n g Lan gl ey ’ s arg u m en t

, o u r an al y s i s n eces sari l y b eg in s wi t h t h e

c o n t ract u al l an g u ag e at i s s u e. Th e card i n al ru le o f co n s t ru ct i o n i s , o f co u rs e, t o

“ as cert ai n t h e i n ten t i o n o f t he part ies

, as set o u t i n t he l an g u ag e o f t he co nt ract .” 5 In

t h i s reg ard

, co nt ract di s p u t es a re “ p art i cu l arl y wel l s ui t ed fo r ad j u d icat i o n by

s u m m ary ju d g m en t becau se co ns t ru ct i o n o f co nt ract s i s o rd i n ari l y a m at t er o f l aw fo r

t h e co u rt .” 6 An d i t i s wel l es t ab l i s h ed t h at co nt ract co ns t ru ct i o n en t ai l s a t h ree-s t ep

p ro ces s , b eg i nn i n g w i t h t he t ri al co u rt ’ s d et erm i n at i o n as t o “ w h et h er t h e l an g u ag e

i s c l e a r an d un am

b i g u ou s .” 7 If n o co n s t ru ct i o n i s req u i red becau s e t h e lan g u ag e i s

p l ai n , th e co u rt th en en fo rces t h e co n t ract acco rd i n g t o it s t erm s. 8 Bu t i f t h ere i s an y

am bi g ui t y , t h e co u rt p ro ce e d s t o t h e s eco n d s t ep , wh i ch i s t o “ ap p l y t h e ru l es o f

5 Cl a r k v. A g Geo r

g i a Fa r m Cr ed i t ACA

, 3 3 3 Ga. A p p

. 7 3

, 7 5 -7 6 (1 ) (7 7 5 SE2 d

5 5 7 ) (2 0 15 ) (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ); a cco r d E nvi s i o n Pr i n t in g

, LLC v. Eva n s , 3 3 6 Ga. Ap p

. 6 3 5

, 6 3 8 (1 ) (7 8 6 SE2 d 2 5 0 ) (2 0 1 6 ); S hep h er d v. Gr eer

, Kl o s i c & Da u g h er t

y , 3 2 5 Ga. Ap p . 1 8 8 , 1 8 9 -9 0 (7 5 0 SE2 d 4 6 3) (2 01 3 ).

6 El w el l v. Keef

e , 3 12 Ga. Ap p

. 3 9 3

, 3 9 4 -9 5 (7 18 SE2 d 5 87 ) (2 0 1 1 ) (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ); a cco r d Eva n s , 3 3 6 Ga. Ap p . at 6 3 8 (1 ).

7 Eva n s , 3 3 6 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 3 8 (1 ) (p u n ct u at i o n om i t t ed ); acco r d M i ch n a v. B l u e Cr o s s & Bl u e S

h i el d o f Ga

. , In c. , 2 8 8 Ga. Ap p . 1 1 2, 1 1 3 (6 5 3 SE2 d 3 77 ) (2 0 0 7 ).

8 Eva n s , 3 3 6 Ga. Ap p. at 6 3 8 (1 ); Mi ch na , 2 88 Ga. Ap p . at 1 13

.

5c o n t r a ct co n s t ru ct i o n to res o l v e t h e am b i g u i t y .” 9 Fi n al l y , i n t h e t h i rd s tep

, “ i f t h e

am bi g ui t y rem ai n s aft e r a p p l y i n g t h e ru l es o f co n s t ru ct i o n , t h e i ss u e o f wh at t h e

am bi g uo u s l an g u ag e m ean s an d w h a t t he p art i es i n t en d ed m u s t b e res o l ved b y a

ju ry .” 1 0

Here, we ag ree wi t h t h e t ri al co u rt t h at t here i s n o a m b i g u i t y in t h e l an g u ag e

o f t h e rel ev an t co n t ract u al pro vi s i o n

. In d eed

, i t s m ean i n g i s p erfect l y cl ear: “ To t h e

ex t en t al lo wed b y l aw, Res i d en t al s o ag rees an d u n d ers t an ds t h at a n y l eg al a ct i o n

ag ai n s t M an ag em en t o r Own er m u s t b e i n s t i t u t ed wi th i n on e y ear o f t h e d at e an y

cl ai m o r cau s e of act i o n ari s es an d t hat a n y a ct i o n fi l ed aft er o n e y ear fro m s u ch d at e

s h al l b e t i m e b arred as a m at t er o f l aw.” 1 1 As a res u l t

, t h e o n e-y ear co n t ract u al

l i m i tat i on peri o d en co m

p as s ed b y Lan g l ey ’ s l eas e wi t h Sp ri n g Lak e was ap p l i cab l e

t o a n y a ct i o n , n o t ju st t h o s e wh i c h a r o s e fro m b reach es o f t he l eas e. Acco rd i n g l y ,

al t h o u g h p ers o n al -i nju ry cl ai m s are ord i n ari l y s u b ject t o a t wo -y ear s t at u t e o f

9 Eva n s , 3 3 6 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 3 8 (1 ) (p u n ct uat i o n o m i t ted ); a cco r d M i ch n a , 2 8 8 Ga. Ap p . at 1 1 3

.

1 0 Eva n s , 3 3 6 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 3 8 (1 ) (p u nct u at i o n o m i tt ed ); acco r d Mi ch n a , 2 8 8 Ga. Ap p . at 1 1 3

.

1 1 (Em p has is s u pp l i ed ).

6l i m i tat i on , 1 2 Lan g l ey co n t ract u al ly ag reed t o b ri n g a ny act io n ag ai ns t S p ri n g

Lak e— i n cl u d i n g , b u t n o t l i m i t ed t o , pers on al -i n ju ry act i o ns

— wi t h i n o ne y ear. An d

Lan gl ey fai l ed to d o t h i s w h e n s h e fi l ed s u i t o n M arch 3

, 2 0 1 6

, s eek in g t o reco v er

d am ag es fo r an in

ju ry t h at o ccu rred o n M arch 3 , 2 0 1 4

.

W e fu r t h e r r e

ject Lan g l ey ’ s as s ert i o n t h at t h e p ro v i s io n at is s u e s ho u l d b e

u n en fo rceab l e as a m a t t e r o f l aw, wh en co n t ract u al -l i m i t at i o n -p eri od cl au s es are

en fo rceab l e i n Geo rg i a. 1 3 An d Lan g l ey p o i n t s us t o no s u p p o rt i n g au th o ri t y t hat h o l d s

1 2 S ee OCGA § 9 -3 -3 3

.

1 3 See Ra i n & Ha i l In s

. S

er vs

., In c. v. Vi cker

y , 2 7 4 G a. Ap p

. 4 2 4

, 4 2 5 (1 ) (6 1 8

SE2 d 1 1 1 ) (2 0 0 5 ) (“ Th i s Co urt h as p rev i o u s l y fo u n d th i s co n tract u al l i m i t at i o n

p ro v is i o n t o b e en fo rceab l e.”); Da i l ey v. Co t t o n S t a t es Mu t. In s

. Co

. , 2 0 7 Ga

. A p p. 1 3 9

, 1 3 9 (4 2 7 SE2 d 1 0 9) (1 99 3) (“ Th ere i s n o q ues t i o n t h at co nt ract u al l i m i t at i on s

are v al i d an d wi l l b e en fo rced b y t h e co u rt s .” (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t ted )); s e e a l s o Th o r nt o n v. Ga

. Fa rm Bu r ea u Mu t

. In s

. Co

. , 2 8 7 Ga. 3 7 9

, 3 8 0 (1 ) (6 9 5 SE2 d 6 4 2 ) (2 0 1 0) (“ [Ap pel l an t] fai ls t o reco g n i ze t h e di s t i n ct i o n b et ween a s t at ut e o f l i m i t at i o n

an d i t s p art i cu l ar l an g u ag e an d a co n tract u al p eri o d o f l im it at i o n an d i t s p art i cu l ar l an g u ag e. Th ey can b e si g n i fi can t l y di fferen t, as d em o n s t rat ed b y t h e f a ct t h at t h e

s t at u te o f l i m i t at i o n fo r co nt ract cl ai m s i s s i x y ears , b u t t h e co u rt s h av e n ev ert h el es s

en fo rced m

u ch s h o rt er co n t ract u al p eri o d s o f l i m i tat i o n , i n cl ud i n g t he o n e-y ear l i m i tat i on i n i n s u ran ce p o l i ci es l i k e t he o n e i n t h i s cas e.” (ci t at i o n o m i t t ed )).

M o reo v er, al t h o u g h s ev eral o f o u r s i s t er st at es ad m i t t ed l y d i s a l l o w co n t ract u al

p ro v is i o n s s ho rt en i n g s t at u t es of l i m i t at i o n , t h ey al l d o s o o n l y as a res u l t o f st at u t o ry

p ro h ib i t i on s o n s u ch ag reem e n t s

. S ee S.C. C O D E A

N N

. § 1 5 -3 -1 4 0 (“

No cl au s e

. . . wh ereb y i t i s ag reed t h at ei t h er p art y sh al l b e barred fro m bri n g in g s u i t u p o n an y

cau s e o f act i on ari s in g o u t o f t h e co n t ract i f n o t b ro u g h t wi t h i n a p eri o d l es s t h an t h e

t i m e p res cri b ed b y

t h e s tat u t e o f l i m i t at io n s

. . . s h al l b ar su ch act i o n, b u t t h e act i o n

m ay b e b ro u gh t n o t wi t h s t a n d i n g s uch cl au se, p ro v i s i o n o r ag reem en t i f b ro u g ht

7s u ch p ro v i s i o n s are i n ap pl i cab le t o p ers o n al -i n ju ry act i o n s. 1 4 A l th o u g h t h e l an g u ag e

wi t h i n t h e t i m e p res cri b ed by t he s t at ut e o f li m i t at i o n s i n referen ce to l i k e cau s es o f

act i on .”); F LA

. S T A T

. § 9 5 .0 3 (“ An y pro v i si o n i n a co n t ract fi x i n g t h e p eri o d o f t i m e wi t h i n w h i ch an act i o n ari s i n g o u t o f t h e co n t ract m ay b e b eg un at a t i m e les s t h an

t h at p ro v i d ed b y th e ap p l i cab l e s t at u te o f li m i tat i o n s i s v o i d .”); A LA

. C O D E § 6 -2 -1 5 (“ [A] n y ag reem en t o r s t i pu lat i o n, v erb al or wri t t en , wh ereb y t h e t i m e fo r t h e

co m m en cem en t o f an y act io n i s l i m i t ed t o a t i m e l es s th an t h at p res cri b ed by l aw fo r

t h e co m m en cem en t o f s u ch act i o n i s v o id

. ”); M IS S

. C O D E

. A N N

. § 1 5

- 1

- 5 (“ Th e l i m i tat i on s p res cri b ed i n t h is ch ap t er s h al l n o t b e ch an g ed i n an y way wh at s o ev er by

co n tract b et ween p art i es , an d an y ch an g e in s u ch l i m i t at i o n s m ad e b y an y co n t ract s

s t ip u l at i o n wh at so ev er s h al l b e ab s o l u t el y n u l l an d v o id [.] ”). Bu t i n t h e ab s en ce o f a

s t at u to ry p ro h ib it i o n , ot her s t at e co u rt s h av e g en eral l y u p h el d t h e v al i di t y o f cl au s es

s h o rt en i n g a p art y ’ s t i m e t o s u e. S ee Cecco n e v. Ca r r o l l Ho me S er vs

., LLC

, 1 6 5 A3 d

4 7 5

, 4 8 3 (II) (B) (M d

. C t

. Ap p

. 2 0 17 ) (“ [P] art i es m ay ag ree t o a p ro v i s i o n t h at

m o di fi es t h e l i m it at i o n s res ul t t h at wo u l d o t h erwi s e p ert ai n p ro v id ed (1 ) t h ere i s n o

co n tro l l in g s t at u t e t o t h e co nt rary , (2 ) i t is reas o n ab l e, an d (3 ) i t i s n o t s u b ject t o o t h er d efen s es s u ch as frau d

, d u res s , o r m i s rep res en t at i o n .” (p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed )); To wn

o f Cr o s s vi l l e Ho u s

. Au t h

. v. Mu r p h y , 4 6 5 SW 3 d 5 74

, 5 7 9 (II) (Ten n. Ct

. Ap p

. 2 0 1 4 ) (n o t i ng “ Ten n es s ee co urt s h av e l o ng u p h el d co nt ract u al l i m i t at i o n s t h at r e d u c e t h e

s t at u to ry p eri o d fo r fi l in g su i t ”); Bd

. o f S up ’r s of Fa i r f a x Ct y. v. S a mp s o n , 3 6 9 SE2 d

1 7 8

, 1 8 0 (Va. 19 8 8 ) (“ Part i es t o a co n t ract p ro perl y m ay ag ree t h at a cl ai m u n d er t h e

co n tract m

u s t be en fo rced wi t h i n a s h o rt er t i m e l i m i t t h an t h at fi x ed b y s t at u t e i f t h e

co n tra c t u a l pro v i s i o n i s no t ag ai n s t p ub l i c p o l icy an d i f t h e ag reed t i m e i s n ot

u n r e a s o n a b l y s h o rt .”); s ee al s o S t eel e v. S

af eco In s. Co

. o

f Am.

, Cas e No

. COA1 2

- 2 6 6

, 7 3 5 S E2 d 4 5 1 (Tab le), 2 0 1 2 W L 5 8 5 7 3 9 3

, at * 4 (NC Ct

. Ap p

. 2 0 1 2 ) (u n p ub l is h ed ) (p erm i t t i n g a co n t ract u al l y s h o rt en ed s t at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n wh en No rt h

Caro l i n a l aw d i d n o t s p eci fi cal l y p ro h i b i t s u ch an ag reem en t b et ween t h e p art i es ).

Si m i l arl y , wh en o u r Gen eral As s em b l y h as rem ai n ed s i l en t , we are b o un d t o fo l l o w

t h e co m m o n l aw, w hi ch h as co n si s t en t l y p erm i t t ed co n t ract u al -l i m i t at i on -p eri o d

cl au s es

. S ee W o lf Cr eek La n d

f i ll

, LLC v. Twi

gg s Ct y

. , 3 3 7 G a. Ap p

. 2 1 1

, 21 4 (1 ) (7 8 6

SE2 d 8 6 2 ) (2 0 16 ) (“ W h i l e so m e s t at es h av e s t at u t ory o r ju d i c i a l res t ri ct i on s

p ro h ib i t i ng o r l i m it in g co n tract u al ex t en s i on s o f st at ut es o f l i m i t at i o n , Geo rg i a d o es

n o t .” (fo o t no tes o m i t t ed )).

8o f t h e l i m i t at io n -o n -act i o ns p ro v i s i o n i s b ro ad an d d o es no t ex p li ci t l y s p eci fy t h at i t

i n cl u d es p ers o n al -i n

ju ry act i o n s , 1 5 i t nev er t h e les s en co m p as s es a n y l eg a l a ct i o n

Lan gl ey m i g h t h av e i n s t i t u t ed ag ai n s t t h e o wn er or m a n a g em en t o f h er ap art m en t

co m p l ex

. Th u s , L a n g ley ’ s rep eat ed as sert i o ns t h at h er p ers o nal -i n ju ry cl ai m i s

“ u n rel at ed ” t o th e co n tract are o f n o co n s eq u en ce b ecau s e h er p ers o n al -i nju ry cl ai m ,

a n d a n y o t h er cl a i m t hat s h e m i gh t hav e b ro u g h t ag ai ns t Sp ri n g Lak e, were

en co m p as s ed b y t h i s b ro ad co nt ract u al l im it at i o n p eri o d

.

Fu r t h e rm ore, it i s w el l es t ab l i s h ed

, i n Geo rg i a, t h at “ u n les s p ro h i b i t ed by

s t at u te or p u b li c p o l i cy , [al l part i es ] are free to co n t ract o n a n y t erm s reg ard i n g a

1 4 S ee C O U R T O F A P P E A LS R. 2 5 (a) (3 ) (“ Part Th ree [o f ap p el l an t ’ s b ri ef] s h al l

c o n t ai n t h e arg u m en t an d ci t at i o n o f au t h o ri ti es

. It sh al l al s o i n cl u d e a co n ci s e

s t at em en t o f t h e ap p l i cab l e st an d ard o f rev i ew wi t h su p p o rt i n g au t h o ri t y fo r each

i s su e p res en t ed i n t h e b ri ef.”).

1 5 C f

. S co tt v. In g Cl a r i o n Pa r t n er s

, LLC

, 2 0 0 7 W L 1 39 1 3 8 6

, at * 1 (ND Ga.

M ay 7

, 2 0 0 7 ) (d ecl in i n g t o ad d res s , aft er reach i n g d et erm i n at i v e co n cl u si o n o n fi rs t

t wo arg u m en ts

, t h i rd an d fi n al arg u m en t i n fav o r o f ju dg m en t o n t h e p l ead i n g s , wh i ch

was t h at act i o n was b arred by co n t ract u al l i m it at io n cl au s e p ro v id i n g t h at “ Res i d en t

ag rees an d u n ders t an d s t h at an y leg al act i o n i n s t i t u t ed ag ai n s t M an ag em en t o f o r rel at ed t o an y cl ai m s o r cau s es o f act io n ari s i ng fo r an y reas on wh at s o ev er, i n cl u d i n g

p ers o n al i n

ju ry , b o d i l y i n

ju ry an d / o r p ro pert y d am ag e, s h al l b e fi led o n l y i n t h e S u p e r i o r Co u rt or St at e Co u rt o f Co b b Co u n t y , Geo rg i a,” an d t h at “ Res i d en t al s o

ag rees an d u n d ers t an ds t h at an y l eg al act i o n ag ai n s t M an ag em en t m u s t b e i ns t i t u t ed

wi t h i n o n e y ear o f t h e d at e an y cl ai m o r cau s e o f act io n a r i s es an d t h at an y act i o n fi led aft er o n e y ear fro m

s u ch d at e s h al l b e t i m e b arred as a m at t er o f l aw”).

9s u b

ject m at t er i n wh i ch t h ey h av e an i n t eres t

, ” 1 6 an d s u ch ag reem en t s wi l l b e en fo rced

b y t h e co u rt s

. 1 7 In deed , we h av e p rev i o us l y reco gn i zed t h at “ co n t ract i n g p art i es are

free t o co n t ract t o wai v e n um ero u s an d s u b s t an t ial ri gh t s [.] ” 1 8 An d wh en we co n s i d er

wh et h er a co n tract p ro vi s io n i s v o i d as ag ai n s t p u b l i c po l i cy , w e fo l l o w t h e ru l e t h at

“ t h e co urt s m

u s t ex erci s e ex trem e cau t i o n i n d ecl ari n g a co n t ract v o i d as ag ai n s t

p u b l i c p o l i cy an d s ho u l d do s o o n l y i n cas es free fro m do u b t .” 1 9 Ou r Su p rem e Co u rt

1 6 Q u i l l e n v

. Qu i ll en , 2 6 5 Ga. 7 7 9

, 7 7 9 (1 ) (4 6 2 SE2 d 7 5 0 ) (1 9 9 5); a cco r d

Gr a nd Ma s t er Co n tr a ct in g

, L.L.C. v. Li n co ln Ap a r t men t Mg mt

. Lt d

. P’s hi p , 3 1 4 Ga. Ap p

. 4 4 9

, 4 5 1 (1 ) (7 2 4 SE2 d 4 5 6 ) (2 0 1 2 ); s e e I n t ’ l Bi och emi ca l In d

u s

., In c. v. Ja mes t own Mg mt

. Co r

p

. , 2 6 2 G a

. Ap p

. 7 7 0

, 77 3 (1 ) (5 86 SE2 d 4 4 2) (2 0 0 3 ) (“ It i s

g e neral co nt ract l aw i n Geo rg i a t h at p art i es are free t o co n tract ab o ut an y s u b j e c t

m at t er, o n an y t erm s , u n l es s p ro h i b i t ed b y s t at u t e or p u b l i c p ol icy

, an d i n ju ry t o t h e

p u b l i c i n t eres t cl earl y ap p ears .” (p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed )); Cen t u r y 2 1 Pi n et r ee Pr o

ps

., In c. v. Ca s o n , 2 20 Ga. Ap p

. 3 5 5

, 3 5 6 (2 ) (b ) (4 6 9 SE2 d 4 58 ) (1 9 9 6) (s am e); Ta h o eVi n i n g s v. Vi n i n g

s Pa r t n er s , 2 0 5 Ga. Ap p

. 8 29

, 8 30 (1 ) (4 2 4 SE2 d 30 ) (1 9 9 2 ) (s am e);

s ee al s o OCGA § 13 -8 -2 (a) (“ A co n t ract t h at is ag ai n s t t he p o l i cy o f t he law can n ot
b e en fo rced .”).

1 7 Gr a n d Ma s t er Co n t r a ct i n g , 3 1 4 Ga. Ap p

. at 4 5 1 (1 ).

1 8 McGr eg o r v. Bd

. o f Reg en t s o f Un i v. S ys

. o f G a

. , 24 9 Ga. Ap p

. 6 1 2

, 6 1 3 (5 4 8

SE2 d 1 1 6 ) (2 0 01 ) (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t ted ); acco r d A et n a W o r ker s’ Co mp Acces s

, LLC

v. Co l i s eu m Med

. Ct r

. , 3 2 2 Ga. Ap p

. 6 4 1 , 6 4 7 (2 ) (7 4 6 SE2 d 1 4 8) (2 01 3 ); Ima g i n g S ys . In t er n

. , In c. v. Ma g n et i c Res o n a n ce Pl u s

, In c. , 2 27 Ga. Ap p . 6 4 1

, 6 4 4 (1 ) (4 9 0

SE2 d 1 2 4) (1 9 9 7).

1 9 E mo r y Un i v. v. P o r u b i a n s ky

, 2 4 8 Ga. 3 9 1

, 3 93 (2 8 2 SE2 d 9 0 3 ) (1 9 8 1 ) (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t ted ); a cco r d P r eci s i o n Pl an n i n g

, In c. v. Ri ch ma r

k Cmt ys

., In c. , 2 9 8

Ga. Ap p

. 7 8

, 7 9 ( 1 ) (6 7 9 SE2 d 4 3 ) (2 0 0 9 ); Ed wa r d s v. Gr a p ef i el d s

, In c. , 2 6 7 Ga.

10h as fu rt h er d i rect ed t h at “ [a] co n t ract can n ot b e sai d t o b e c o n t rary t o p u b l i c p o l i cy

u n l es s t h e Gen eral A ss em b l y h as d ecl ared i t t o b e s o, or u n l es s t h e co n s i d erat i o n o f

t h e co n t ract i s co n t rary t o g oo d m o ral s an d co nt rary t o l aw, o r u n l es s t h e co n t ract i s

en t ered i nt o fo r t he p u rp o s e o f effect i n g an i ll eg al o r i m m o ral ag reem en t o r d o i n g

s o m et h in g wh i ch i s i n v i o l at io n o f l aw.” 2 0

Here, t h e p ro v is i o n at i s s ue i s n o t a co n t ract u al o b l i g at io n l i s t ed i n OCGA § 1 3

-

8 -2 (a), wh i ch i n cl u d es a n o n-ex cl u s i v e l i s t o f co n t ract s t h at o u r Gen eral As s em b l y

h as d eem ed co n trary t o p u b li c p o l icy

. 2 1 Th i s , co m b i n e d wi t h o u r Su p rem e Co urt ’ s

ex p li ci t h o l d i n g th at part ies t o a co n t ract hav e t h e p o w er t o “ ag ree am o n g t h em s el v es

Ap p . 3 9 9 , 4 0 4 -0 3 (1 ) (5 9 9 SE2 d 4 8 9 ) (2 0 0 4).

2 0 Dep t

. of Tr a ns

p

. v. Br o o ks

, 2 5 4 Ga. 3 0 3

, 31 2 (1 ) (3 2 8 SE2 d 70 5 ) (1 9 8 5 ) (p er

cu ri am ) (p u n ct u at i o n om i tt ed ); a cco r d Ca mp v. Aet n a In s

. Co

. , 1 7 0 Ga. 46

, 5 0 (1 5 2

SE 4 1 ) (1 9 30 ); Pr o vi d

en ce Co n s t

. Co

. v. Ba u er , 2 29 Ga. A p p

. 6 79

, 6 8 1 (1 ) (4 9 4 SE2 d

5 2 7 ) (1 9 9 7 ).

2 1 S ee O CGA § 1 3 -8 -2 (a) (1 )-(5 ) (“ Co n t ract s d eem ed co n t rary t o p u b l i c p o l i cy i n cl u d e b u t a r e n o t l i m it ed to : (1 ) Co n t ract s t en d in g t o co rru p t l eg i s l at i o n o r t h e ju d i ci ary ; (2 ) Co n t ract s i n g en eral res t rai nt o f t rad e, as d i s t i n gu i s h ed fro m co n t ract s wh i ch res t ri ct cert ai n co m p et i ti v e act i v i t i es , as p ro v id ed i n A rt i cl e 4 o f t h i s ch ap t er; (3 ) Co n t ract s to ev ad e or o p p o se t h e rev en u e l aws of an o t h er co u n t ry ; (4 ) W ag eri n g

co n tract s; o r (5 ) Co n tract s o f m ai n t en an ce o r ch am p ert y .”); see a l

so RS N Pr o p s

., In c.

v

. E n g ’ g C o n s u l t i n g S

er vs

., Lt d

. , 3 0 1 Ga. Ap p. 5 2

, 5 3 (6 8 6 SE2 d 8 5 3) (2 0 0 9 ) (h o l d i n g t h at l i m i t at i on -o f

- l i a b i l i t y p ro v i s i o n d i d n ot v i o l at e p u b l ic po l i cy an d was

en fo rceab l e wh en p ro v i s i on d i d n o t creat e a co n t ract u al o b l ig at io n en co m p as s ed by OCGA § 1 3 -8 -2 (a), n o r was i t o t h erwi se co n t rary t o p ub l ic p ol i cy ).

11u p o n a p eri o d o f t i m e w h ich wo u l d am o u n t t o a s t at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n s , ei th er g reat er

o r l es s th a n t h e p eri o d fi xed b y t h e l aw,” 2 2 lead s u s t o co n cl u d e t h at t h e u n am b i g u ou s

p r o v i s i o n at i s s u e is en fo rceab l e. Acco rd i n g l y , a n y cau se o f act i o n t h at accru e d

d u ri n g t h e d u rat i on o f L an g l ey ’ s l eas e— i n cl u d i n g a cau s e o f ac t i o n fo r p ers o n al

i n ju ri es

— was s ub

ject t o t h e o n e-y ear co n t ract u al l i m i t at i o n p eri o d

.

Fo r al l t h es e reas o n s, we affi rm t he t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f s u m m ary ju d g m en t to

Sp ri n g Lak e.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Do yl e, P. J., a n d

Mer ci er , J., co n cu r

.

2 2 Ma s s

. Ben

. Li

f e As s ’n v. Ro b i n s o n , 1 0 4 Ga. 2 5 6

, 2 7 2 (1 ) (3 0 SE 9 18 ) (1 8 9 8 ) (em p h a s i s s u p p l i ed ); s ee a ls o W o l f Cr eek La nd

f i l l

, 3 3 7 Ga. Ap p

. at 2 1 4 (1 ) (reco g n i zi n g th at “ [w] hi l e s o m e s t at es hav e s t at u t o ry o r j u d ici al res t ri ct i on s

p ro h ib i t i ng o r l i m it in g co n tract u al ex t en s i on s o f st at ut es o f l i m i t at i o n , Geo rg i a d o es

n o t .” (fo o t no tes o m i t t ed )).

12