SECOND DI VI SI ON

M I LLER, P. J.

, BROWN and GOSS, 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 l s .us /r ule s

Septem ber 26, 2018



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 8 A1 42 0

, A1 8 A 1 4 2 1. W HITAKER FARM S, LLC v

. FITZGERALD FRUIT FARM S, LLC; an d v i ce v ers a.

B R O W N , J u d g e.

W h i t ak er Farm s

, LLC ap p e al s fo l l o wi n g a ju ry verd i ct i n fav o r o f Fi t zg eral d

Fru i t Farm s, LLC o n Fi t zg eral d Farm s ’ co m p l ai n t s eek i n g d am ag es fo r t res p as s aft er

W h i t ak er Farm s ’ p ro p ert y m an ag er l o ck ed t h e gat es t o t h e p ea c h o r c h ard wh ere

Fi t zg eral d Farm s was harv es t i ng p each es

. In Cas e N o . A1 8 A 1 4 2 0 , W hi t ak er Farm s

co n ten d s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n d en y i n g i t s m o t io n fo r a d i rect ed verd i ct an d

m o ti o n fo r ju d g m en t n o t wi t h st an d i n g t h e v erd ict o n th e t res p as s cl ai m

, an d award i n g

Fi t zg eral d Farm s at t o r n e y fees

. Fi tzg eral d Farm s cro s s -ap p eal s in Cas e No

.

A1 8 A1 42 1

, arg u i ng t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y n o t al l o wi n g t h e ju ry t o co n s i d er an

award o f p u n i t iv e d am ag es

. Fo r reas o ns t h at fo l l o w

, we affi rm t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d en i alo f W h it ak er Farm s ’ m o t i o n f o r a d i rect ed verd i ct an d m o ti o n fo r ju d g m en t

n o t wi t h s t an d i n g th e verd i ct

, b ut rev ers e t h e t ri al co urt ’s r efu s al t o al l o w t h e ju ry to

co n si d er an award o f p u ni t i v e d am ag es

.

Co n st ru ed i n fav or o f t he v erd i ct

, Ha g a n v. Keyes

, 3 2 9 G a

. A p p

. 1 7 8 (7 6 4

SE2 d 4 2 3) (2 0 1 4 ), t h e ev id en ce s h ows t h at Sean L en n o n, t h e o wn er o f Fi t zg eral d

Farm s, b eg an wo rk i n g fo r Carro l l Farm s i n h ig h s ch oo l . Carro l l Farm s was a p each

an d cat tl e farm i n M eri wet h er Co un t y o wn ed b y L en n o n’ s m a t h t each er, E l i zab et h

“ Kay ” Carro l l Barn es

, an d h er s o n

, W al t er “ Hy n es ” Barn es ; Hy n es ran th e b u s i n es s

an d m an ag ed t h e fam i l y ’ s farm p r o p ert i es

. Th ro u g h o u t h i g h s ch o o l an d co l l eg e,

Len no n w o r k e d at Carro l l Farm s du ri n g t h e s u m m er m o n t h s

. Aft er o b t ai n i n g a

m as t er’ s d eg ree i n 2 0 0 3

, Len n o n b eg an wo rk i n g fu l l -t i m e farm i n g p each es at Carro l l

Farm s. So m et i m e aro u nd 2 0 0 6, Hy n es an d Kay ag reed to al l ow Len n o n t o g ro w Bab y

Go l d p each es on a 20 -acre t ract o f t h ei r farm aft er h e was ap p ro ach ed b y a Can ad i an

can n i n g c o m

p an y lo o k i n g fo r p eo p l e to g ro w Bab y Go l d peach es fo r u s e i n b ab y

fo o d

. Len n o n t es t i fi ed th at th e part i es h ad an “ o ral h an d s h ak e d eal ” fo r hi m t o l eas e

t h e 2 0-acre t ract fo r t h e eco n o m i c li fe o f t h e peach t rees (1 0 -1 5 y ears ), an d t h at

Len no n an d Kay l at er si g ned a wri t t en l eas e ag reem en t s o t h at Len n o n co u l d o b t ai n

2cro p i n s u ran ce. 1 L en no n m ai n t ai n ed h i s o wn p ack i n g faci l i t y

, i n cl u di n g a co m m erci al

p ack in g s h ed an d a fo rced ai r co o l er, wh i ch co ol s th e p each es rap i d l y b ecau s e “ t h ey

can ’ t t ol erat e [t h e s u m

m er] h eat fo r t h at l o n g ”; Fi t zg eral d Farm s h as t he on l y fo rced

ai r co ol er i n M eri wet h er Co u n ty

.

Un b ek n o wn s t t o Len n on

, i n Oct o b er 2 0 1 5

, Hy n es a n d C u rt i s W h i tak er, t h e

o wn er of W h i t ak er Fa r m s

, a g r e e d t h at W hi t ak er Farm s wo u l d b u y 2 90 acres o f

Carro l l Farm s

, i n c l u d i n g th e 2 0 -acre o rch ard o n w h i ch Fi t zg eral d Farm s h ad b een

farm i n g peach es fo r o v er a d ecad e an d a s ep arat e 9 5 -acre t ract

, as wel l as t h e Carro l l

Farm s “ b u s i nes s.” 2 At cl o s i n g

, b o t h Hy n es an d Kay s i g n ed an Own er’ s Affi d av i t

s weari n g t h at t h e p ro p ert y was “ s u b ject to n o l eas es

, t en an ci es

, ad v ers e p o s s es s i o n,

o ccu pan cy

ri g h t s, l i cen s es , o r s i m i l ar cl ai m s b y t hi rd p art i es .” Hy n es n ev er ad v i s ed

1 A co p y o f t h e wri t t en l eas e co u l d n ot b e fo u n d

, b u t ev i d en ce was p res en t ed

t h at Len n o n m ai n t ai n ed cro p i ns u ran ce o n t h e Bab y Go l d o rch ard fo r at leas t 2 0 1 3

-

2 0 1 6

, a n d bo t h Len n o n an d H y n es co n fi rm ed t hat L en n o n co u l d n ot h av e o b t ai n e d

cro p i ns u ran ce wi th o u t a wri t ten l eas e. An d

, acreag e rep o rt s fo r t h e y ears 2 0 0 9 -2 0 1 6,

p ro d uced b y t h e Un i ted St at es Dep art m en t o f Ag ri cu l t u re, Farm Serv i ce Ag en cy

, l i s t

Len no n as “ o t h er t en an t ” of t he farm /t ract o f l an d o n wh ich h e g rew t h e Bab y Go ld s

.

2 Hy n es t es t i fi ed t h at h e an d W h i tak er h av e b een fri en ds fo r ap pro x i m at el y 1 5

y ears

. In l at e 2 0 1 4

, t h e ban k fo recl o s ed o n an o t h e r p i e ce o f p ro p ert y o wn ed b y t h e

Barn e s f a m i l y

. H y n es an d W h i t ak er d is cu s s ed t h at W h i t ak er wo u l d b i d o n t h e

p ro p ert y an d t hat “ ‘ at s om e po i n t Cu rt i s W h i t ak er wo u l d al l ow [Hy nes ] to b u y i t

b ack

. ’ ” W h i tak er d i d n o t wi n t h e b i d

. H yn e s c o n fi rm ed t h at Len n o n o r Fi t zg eral d

Farm s wo n t he b i d

.

3W h i t ak er t h at Len no n “ h ad p lan t ed a 2 0 -acre p each o rch ard [o n t h e p ro p ert y ] an d h ad

farm ed i t ev ery y ear fo r a d ecad e” b ecau s e h e “ d id n ’ t feel li k e i t was n eces s ary

. Th e

l an d was s o l d

, an d t h ere was n o l eas e.” 3 Aft er t h e p u rch as e, Hy nes ag reed t o m an ag e

t h e p ro p ert y

fo r W h i t ak er Farm s an d t es ti fi ed t hat h e wo rk s as a co n t ract o r.

Sev eral m o n t h s aft er th e s al e, Len n o n an d h i s w o rk ers b eg an t o p rep are fo r t h e

2 0 1 6 harv es t, wh i ch i n c l u d e d reg u l arl y s p ray i n g t h e Bab y Go l d p each t rees i n t h e

“ J o n es Ch ap el Bab y Go l d Tract ” f r o m Decem

b er 20 1 5 t hro u g h J u l y 2 0 16

. Len n o n

3 Hy n es d i d n o t t el l W h i t ak er ab o u t L e n n o n ’ s Bab y Go l d orch ard un t i l Ap ri l

2 0 1 6

, wh en Hy n es s aw t h at Fi t zg eral d Farm s h ad “ pu s hed u p ” 2 7 0 ex p eri m en t al t rees

t h at Len n o n h ad p l an t ed on t h e p ro p ert y s o m et i m e aft er 2 0 0 6

. Len n on ex p lai n ed t h at

aft er h e p l a n t e d t h e Bab y Go l d p each t rees in 2 00 6

, he p l an ted a t es t bl o ck o f

ex p eri m en t al t rees wh i ch h e n ev er h arv es t ed b eca use the “ tr e e s ne ve r c ro p ped .” W h en

t h o s e t rees were n i n e-y ears o l d

, Len n on d eci d ed t o “ p u sh [] t h em u p

. ” L e n n o n

ex p lai n ed t h at i t i s i m

p o rt an t t o “ p u s h u p” n on -p ro du ci n g t rees b ecau s e “ a s p a r t o f

b ei n g a g o o d s t eward t o t h e l an d an d ju s t b ei n g a g o o d farm er, y o u j u s t d o n ’ t wan t to

l eav e t h i n g s g ro wi n g u p t here . . . t h ey ’ l l ju s t ro t ” an d b eco m e i n fes ted wi t h i n s ect s

wh i ch wi l l t hen i n v ad e a nei g h b o ri n g v i g o ro u s o rch ar d

. Wh e n W h i t ak er fo u n d o ut

fro m H y n es t h at Len n o n h ad “ p u s h e d u p ” t h e ex p eri m en t al t rees

, h e rep o rt ed t h e

i n ci d en t to t h e S h e r i ff, co m pl ai n i n g t h at Len n o n o r h is crew d am ag ed “ 2 0 0

, 2 2 0

p each t rees ” o n hi s p ro p ert y

. A d ep u t y ad v i s ed Wh i t a k e r t hat t h e i s s u e was a ci v i l

m at t er b ecau s e Len n on an d Hy n es “ en t ered i n to an ag reem en t an d

. . . o wn ed t h es e

t rees t o get h er fro m m

y u n d ers t an d in g at t h at t i m e

. . . th ey bo t h h ad o w n ers h i p o f t h e

t rees

. . . . [A] s far as d am ag i n g t h e t rees

, . . . i t ’s p art o f M r. Len n o n ’ s p ro p ert y .”

W h en t h e d ep u t y referred W h i tak er t o t he m ag is trat e co u rt

, h e recal l ed t h at W h i t ak er

b ecam e “ s o m ewh at ab ras i v e” b ecau s e Len n o n w a s n o t g oi n g to b e arres t ed

i m m ed i at el y

.

4t es t i fi ed t h at h e n ev er o bs erv ed Wh i t a k e r i n t h e orch ard d u ri n g t h at t i m e, b u t t h at

Hy nes d ro v e b y t h e p ack i ng s h ed at leas t a d o zen t i m es ev ery d ay

, n ev er s t op p i n g to

s ay a wo rd

. On Au g u s t 3

, 2 0 1 6

, “ t h e d ay b efo re h arv es t,” Len no n an d h i s wo rk ers

m o ved t h ei r eq u i p m en t t o t h e o rc h a r d s o t h ey wo u l d be read y t o b eg i n p i ck i n g t h e

fo l l o w i n g m orn i n g

. Th e fo l lo wi n g m o rn i n g

, a crew o f ap p ro xi m at el y 2 5 -2 8 wo rk ers

g a t hered at t h e orch ard t o b eg i n h arv es t i n g t h e p each es

. Lev i J ack s on

, a Fi t z g e r a l d

Farm s em

p l o y ee, t es t i fi ed t h at wh i l e h e was wo rk i ng t h at m o rn i n g

, h e o b s erv ed

Hy nes d ri v i n g “ do wn t h e ro ad t h at cu t s th ro u g h t h e o rch ard .” J ack s o n l eft t h e o rch ard

wi t h t h e fi rs t l oad o f p each es

, dro p p ed t h em at Fi tzg eral d Farm s ’ pack i n g s h ed an d

t h en ret u rn ed t o t h e orch ard to p i ck u p a s eco n d lo ad ; at th at t i m e, al l o f t h e g at es to

t h e o rch ard were u n l o ck ed

. W h en Jack s o n t ri ed t o l eav e t h e p ro pert y wi t h t h e s eco n d

l o ad

, h e fo u n d t h at al l t h ree ga t e s t o th e o rch ard h ad b een lo ck ed an d h e o b s erv ed

Hy nes dri v i n g away fro m o ne o f t h e gat es

. Acco rd i n g t o J ack s o n

, “ o u r l o ck was t o o k

o ff o f [t h e g a t e]

, an d i t h ad a co m b i n at i on lo ck on it .” Fo r h i s p art

, Hy n es t es t i fi ed

t h at h e n ev er s aw an y o n e p i ck i n g peach es o n Au g u s t 4

, 2 0 1 6

, an d th at he ch an g ed t h e

l o ck to a co m

b i n at i on lo ck becau se “ [e] v ery l o ck o n t h e farm h a[d ] been ch an g ed to

a co m b i nat i o n l o ck .”

5W h en J ack s o n real i zed h e an d t he wo rk ers were l o c k e d i n t h e o rch ard

, h e

cal l ed Len n o n

. Len n o n i m m ed i at el y t ex t ed Hy n es as k i n g i f h e co u l d u n l o ck t h e g at e

an d Hy n es t ex ted b ack : “ ‘ Y o u wi l l n eed t o t al k t o Cu rt i s W h i tak er t h at no w o wn s i t

.

I w i l l s en d y o u h i s nu m

b er.’ ” Len n o n l eft a vo i ce m ai l fo r W h i t ak er 4 an d al s o cal l ed

t h e s heri ff’ s offi ce. Th e reco rd refl ect s t h at Hy n e s i m m ed i at el y cal l ed W h i t ak er to

ad v is e t h at h e had g i v e n W hi t ak er’ s p ho n e n u m b er t o Len no n an d t h at Len n o n

“ wo u l d l i k e t o g e t i n t h e g at e at th e b l ack berri es .” W hi t ak er t es t i fi ed t h at h e an d

Hy nes s p o k e fo r t en m in ut es ab o u t Hy nes “ g oi n g t o t h e m ark et t o b u y m o re p ro d uce”

an d t h at H y n es m en t i o n ed s o m et h i n g ab o u t t he l ock ed g at e, “ b ut [W h i tak er] d i d n ’ t

p ay an y at t en t i o n t o i t .” Acco rd i n g t o H y n es

, W h i t ak er sai d “ h e wo u l d g et wi th

[Len n o n] .” W h i t ak e r a c k no wl ed g ed t h at h e n ev er cal l ed Len n on b ack an d “ n ev er

i n s t ru ct ed Mr. Len n o n to g o co m p l et e t h e h arv es t on m

y p ro p ert y .” W h i t ak er t es t i fi ed

t h at h e d i d n ot “ t h i n k [Len n o n ] h ad an y r i g h t t o b e o u t th ere p i ck i n g p each es ” o n

4 W h i t ak er tes t ifi ed at tri al t h at h e co u l d n o t recal l wh et h er h e h eard Len n o n ’ s

v o i ce m ai l l at e t h a t n i g h t o r th e fo l l o wi n g m o rn i n g

, b u t s t at ed th at he kn ew wh o

Len no n was “ b ecau s e he was t he g u y t h at I un d ers to o d t h at wo rk ed fo r H y nes as an

em pl o y ee t h at b ul ld o zed o ur e x p e ri m en t al t rees

. ” W h i t ak er, i n h i s d ep o s i t i o n

t es t i m o n y, wh i ch w as read t o t h e j u ry

, t es t i fi ed t h at he d i d n o t ret u rn Len n o n ’ s cal l

b ecau s e h e “ real l y d i d n ’ t ev en k n o w wh o [Len n o n ] was

. I m ean , I d o n ’ t ev en k n o w

wh o h e i s

. Pl us at t hi s p oi n t i n t i m e I d o n ’ t th i n k

– y o u k n o w, I d o n’ t t h i n k i t wo u ld

b e g o o d fo r he an d I t o h av e a co n v ers at io n.” W h i t ak er cl ari fi ed “ t h i s p o i n t i n t i m e”

as b ei n g t h e d at e o f h i s d ep o si t i o n as wel l as Au g u s t 4 , 2 0 1 6

.

6W h i t ak er Farm s p ro p ert y an d w h en as k ed wh y h e d i d n o t r e t u rn L en n o n’ s cal l

, h e

s t at ed “ [w] el l , . . . I was g o i n g fro m o n e p l ace, I t h i n k

, t o an o t h er, an d I do n ’ t k n o w

t h at I wo u l d p i ck u p t h e p h o n e an d cal l s om eo n e t h at h ad b u l l d o zed m y p each es

. I

t h o u g h t t h at i s s u e was b eh i n d m e, an d i t h ad b een t h ree o r fo u r m o n t h s .”

Aft er recei v i n g p erm is s i o n fro m a s u p eri o r co u rt ju d g e, t h e sh eri ff cu t t h e l o ck

.

Th e n ex t m o rn i n g

, Hy n es ret u rn ed t o t he p ro p ert y an d re-l o ck ed t h e gat es ; b o t h Hy n es

an d W h it ak er ack n o wl ed g ed t h at t h ey s p o k e at l eas t ei g h t t i m es t h at d ay , b u t co u ld

n o t recal l t h e d et ai l s o f an y o f t ho s e cal l s t ho u gh W hi tak er t es t i fi ed

, “ [w] h en s o m eo n e

s t eal s y o u r p each es y o u

, y ou k n o w, are g o i n g t o hav e a lo t o f co n v ers at i o n ab o ut

t h at .”

On Au g u s t 5, 2 0 16

, Fi t zg eral d Farm s fi l ed a v eri fi ed co m p l ai nt fo r t em

p o rary

res t rai n i n g o rd er ag ai n s t H y n es a s k i n g t h e co u rt fo r au t h o ri zat i o n t o co m p l et e t h e

p each harv es t an d ad v i si n g th at t h e m at t er req u i red i m m ed iat e at t en ti o n b ecau s e an y

d el ay co u l d res ul t i n t he cro p b ei n g ru i n ed

. Fi tzg eral d Farm s ’ at t o rn ey em ai l ed a co py

o f t h e co m

p lai nt to Hy n es o n t h e s am e d ay an d Hy n es i m m ed i at el y f

o r w ard ed t h at

em ai l t o W h i t ak er. On Au g u s t 9

, 2 0 1 6, W h i t ak er ex ecu ted an ap p l i cat i on fo r cri m i n al

a r r e s t w arran t s eek i n g t o k eep Len n o n o ff t h e p ro pert y

. Th ree d ay s l at er, a ju d g e

g ran t ed Fi t zg eral d Farm s’ m o ti o n fo r t em p o r a r y r e str a ining or de r a nd H y ne s un l o ck ed

7t h e g at es at t h e d i rect io n o f W h i t ak er’ s at t o rn ey

, V i r g i l Bro w n. By t h at t i m e, t h e

p each es were “ o v erri p e,” “ decay [ed ] ” an d d am ag ed b y i n sect s ; t h e cro p was ru i n ed

.

Fi t zg eral d Farm s ’ v eri fi ed co m p l ai n t i n cl u ded a cl ai m fo r t res p as s

, an d was

l at er am en d ed to i n cl ud e cl ai m s fo r u n ju s t en ri ch m en t an d at t o rn ey fees u n d er OCGA

§ 1 3 -6 -1 1, an d s o ug h t “ act u al d am ag es ” i n th e am o u n t o f n ot l es s t h an $ 9 0 ,0 0 0 an d

p u n i t i v e d am ag es

. On Sep t em b er 6

, 2 0 1 6

, W h i t ak er Farm s m o v ed to i n t erv en e i n t h e

act i on an d fi l ed an an s wer an d co u n t ercl ai m

. Th e co u rt g ran ted t h e m o t i o n to

i n t erv en e an d

, s h ort l y t h ereaft er, Hy nes was d i s m i ss ed w i t ho u t p reju di ce b y co n s en t

o f t h e p art i es

, an d Fi t zg eral d F a rm s wi t h d rew i t s cl ai m fo r u n ju s t en ri ch m en t

. Th e

t ri al co u rt ru l ed t hat Fi t zg eral d Farm s co u ld n o t s eek p un i t i v e d am ag es

, r e a son i n g t h at

W h i t ak er

d i d n ’ t l o ck t h e wo rk ers i n t h e fi el d

. . . . [W ] h i le i t m ay v ery wel l b e t hat

M r

. Wh i t ak er rat i fi ed [Hy n es ’ ] co n d uct

, t h at rat i fi cat i o n i n m y m i n d

cert ai n l y wo u l d n ’ t al l o w t h e j u ry t o ex t rap o l at e fro m t h at a cl ai m fo r

p u n i t i v e d am ag es

. If [Hy n es ] was i n t h e cas e, I wo u l d l et a cl ai m ag ai n s t

h i m fo r p u n i t i ve d am ag es g o t o t h e ju ry , b u t n o t t h is

.

Fo l l owi n g a tri al o n t h e cl ai m s as s ert ed

, a j u ry fo u n d i n fav o r o f Fi t z g eral d

Farm s i n t h e am ou n t o f $ 1 5 0

, 0 0 0 i n act u al d am ag es

, fo u n d ag ai n s t W hi t ak er Farm s

o n i t s co u n t ercl ai m

, an d co n cl u d ed t hat Fi t zg eral d Farm s was entitl ed t o at t o rn ey fees

.

8In t h e s eco n d ph as e of t h e bi fu rcat ed t ri al o n t he i ss u e o f at t o r n e y f ees

, co u n s el fo r

Fi t zg eral d Farm s t es t i fi ed t h at h i s cl i en t h ad in cu rred at to rn ey fees o f $ 2 4 4 ,1 5 9

, p l u s

ex p en s es o f $2

, 1 7 4

. 6 3

, an d an es t i m at ed $ 15 0 ,0 0 0 fo r t ri al

, b u t th at Fi t zg eral d Farm s

was s eek i n g t o reco ver $ 27 2 ,9 2 9 .2 0

. Th e ju ry award ed Fi t zg eral d Farm s $ 40 0 ,0 0 0 in

at t o rn ey fees p u rs u an t t o OCGA § 1 3 -6 -1 1

. 5 Aft er t h e t ri al co u rt en t ered j u d gm en t in

fav o r o f Fi t zg eral d Farm s in t h e am o u n t o f $ 5 5 0 ,0 0 0, W h i t ak er Farm s fi l ed a m o t i o n

fo r j u d gm en t no t wi t h s t an d in g t h e v erd i ct an d m o t i o n fo r n e w t ri al

. Fo l l o wi ng a

h eari n g

, t h e t ri al co u rt d en i ed W h i t ak er Farm s ’ m ot i o n s

, b u t red u ced t he at t o rn ey fees

award t o $ 2 7 2 ,0 0 0. 6

Ca s e No . A1 8 A1 4 2 0

5 D u ri n g t h e b ifu rcat ed p o rt i o n o f t h e t ri al on at t o rn ey fees

, Len n o n t es t i fi ed

t h at i n an effo rt t o s et t l e th e m at t er, h e m et wi t h W h i t ak er i n J an u ary 2 0 1 7

. W h i t ak er

refu sed t o s et t l e, s t at in g “ ‘ I’ m g o i n g t o m ak e an ex am p le o f y o u

. I’ m go i n g t o m ak e

a p o i nt

. . . . I th ri v e off th i s t y pe o f l it i gat i o n

. . . . I hav e b een i n t h i s t y p e o f l i t i g at i o n

b efo re an d t h at i nd i v i d u al h ad to fi l e b an k ru pt cy

. ’ ” W h i t ak er al s o i n d i cat ed t h at “ h e

was l i t i g at i n g wi t h a b l an k ch eck an d fo r [Len n o n ] t o k eep t h at i n m i nd .”

6 T h e t ri al co u rt g ran t ed W h i t ak er Farm s ’ m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al a s t o at t o rn ey

fees on l y

, co n d i t i o n ed o n Fi t zg eral d Farm s ’ refu s al t o accep t a red u ced j u d gm en t in

t h e am o u n t o f $4 2 2 ,0 0 0 (g en eral d am ag es o f $ 1 5 0,0 0 0 an d red u ced at t o rn ey fees o f

$ 2 7 2 ,0 0 0 ). Fi t zg eral d Farm s fi led a n o t i ce o f accep t an ce o f red u ced OCGA § 1 3 -6 -1 1

at t o rn ey fees award an d m o d i fi ed ju d g m en t

. T h e n o t i ce o f accep tan ce s t at es t h at “ t h e

ju ry award o f $ 15 0 ,0 0 0 i n dam ag es rem ai n s u nch an g ed .” Th e tri al co u rt s u bs eq u en t l y

en t ered a m o d ifi ed ju d g m en t i n t h e am o u n t o f $ 4 22 ,0 0 0

, wh ich al s o n o t ed t h at t h e

o ri g i nal $ 1 5 0 ,0 0 0 d am ag e award rem ai ned u n ch an ged

.

91

. W h i t ak er Farm s co n t en d s t h at t h e t ri al co urt erred i n d en y i n g i t s m o t i o n fo r

a d i rect ed v erd i ct an d m o t i o n fo r ju d g m en t n o twi th s t an di ng t h e v erd i ct o n Fi t zg eral d

Farm s’ cl ai m fo r t res p as s b e c a u s e t h ere was n o ev i d en ce pres en t ed at t ri al t h at

W h i t ak er Farm s ’ rat ifi ed Hy n es ’ “ u n au th o ri zed wro n g .” In s u p po r t o f t h is cl ai m

,

W h i t ak er Farm s argue s tha t F itz ge r a ld Farm s fai l ed t o p ro v i d e ev i d en ce t h at W h i t ak er

Farm s recei v ed a cert ai n

, d i rect t an g i b l e an d v al u ab l e b en efi t fro m t h e u n au t h o ri zed

act . Th i s arg u m en t i s wi t h o u t m eri t

.

“ Th e s t an d ard o f ap p el l at e rev i ew o f a t ri al co urt ’ s d en i al of a m o t i o n f o r a

d i rect ed v erd i ct o r m ot i o n fo r ju d g m en t n o twi th s t an d in g t h e verd i ct i s t h e an y

ev i d en ce t es t

. ” (Ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at io n om i t t ed .) Ba i l ey v. A nn i s t o wn Ro ad Ba p t i s t

Ch u r c h

, 3 0 1 G a

. Ap p

. 6 7 7

, 6 8 5 (5 ) (6 8 9 SE2 d 6 2 ) (2 0 0 9 ). In g en eral

, an em p l o y er

i s n o t r e s p o n s ib l e fo r t h e t o rt s o f i t s i n d ep en d en t co n t ract o r. O CGA § 5 1 -2 -4

. An

ex cep t i o n t o t h i s ru l e ex i s t s, h o wev er, “ [i ] f t h e em p l o y er rat ifi es th e u n au t h o ri zed

wro ng o f t h e in d ep en d en t co n t ract o r.” OCGA § 5 1-2 -5 (6 ). See al s o Jo n es v. Cen iz a

,

2 5 7 Ga. Ap p

. 8 06

, 8 0 8 (1 ) (5 7 2 SE2 d 3 6 2) (2 00 2 ). W h i t a k er Farm s ’ cl ai m fai l s

b ecau s e i t p res u m es t h at recei p t o f a b en efi t i s t h e o n l y way t o p ro v e rat i fi cat i o n b y

an em p lo y er. Rat i fi cat io n can b e ei th er ex p res s, o r i m p li ed fro m : (1 ) sl ig h t act s o f

co n fi rm at i o n b y t h e em

p l o y er; ( 2 ) s i l en ce o r acq u i es cen ce o f t h e em p l o y er; o r (3 )

10wh ere t h e e m p l o y e r recei v es an d h o l d s t h e b en efi t s o f an u n au th o ri zed wro n g

. See

Mer ri t t v. Ma r l i n Ou t d

o o r A d ver t i s i n g

, 2 9 8 G a

. A p p

. 8 7

, 9 1 (2 ) (b ) (6 7 9 SE2 d 9 7 )

(2 0 0 9); Med l ey v. Bo o mer s h i n e Po n t i a c-GMC Tr u ck

, 2 1 4 Ga. Ap p

. 7 9 5

, 7 9 8 -7 9 9 (4 )

(4 4 9 SE2 d 1 2 8 ) (1 99 4 ); Kel l ey v. Ca r o li n a Li f e In s

. Co

. , 48 Ga. Ap p

. 1 0 6 (1 7 1 SE

8 4 7 ) (1 9 3 3 ). See al s o Gr een wa l d v. Ker s h

, 2 6 5 Ga. Ap p

. 1 9 6

, 1 9 8-2 0 1 (1 ) (5 9 3 SE2 d

3 8 1 ) (2 0 0 4 ) (g en e r a l co n t ract o r’ s accep t an ce o f wo rk b y i n d ep en d en t co n t ract o r

am ou n t ed t o rat i fi cat i o n o f t o rt i o u s act ); Ch i p l ey v. Beel er

, 12 2 G a. Ap p. 78 1

, 7 8 2 (1 )

(1 7 8 SE2 d 7 6 7 ) (1 9 70 ) (h o m eo wn er r a t i fi ed co n d u ct o f co un t y by accep t i n g t h e

wo rk ). “ W h et h er rat i fi cat i on occu rred i s u su al l y a q u es t i o n fo r t h e ju ry .” M ed l ey

, 2 1 4

Ga. Ap p . at 7 9 8 (4 ).

In t h i s cas e, t h ere was am p l e ev i d en ce fo r t h e ju ry t o co n cl u d e t h at W h i t ak er

Farm s, as o wn er o f t he p ro pert y

, rat i fi ed Hy n es ’ wro n g fu l co n d u ct . W h i t ak er k n ew

t h at (a) Len n o n h ad o ccu p i ed t he Bab y Go l d o rch ard an d h arv es t ed p each es o n i t fo r

at l e a s t a d ecad e; (b ) Hy n es h ad l o ck ed t h e gat es o f t h e peach o rch ard wh ere

Fi t zg eral d Farm s was h arv es t i n g i t s p each es ; an d (c) an y d el ay i n h arv es t in g co u ld

res u l t i n d es t ru ct i o n o f t h e cro p

. Nev ert h el es s

, W h i t ak er n ei t h er in s t ru ct ed Hy n es to

u n l o ck t h e gat es o n Au g u s t 4

– t h u s al lo wi n g L en n o n an d h i s wo rk ers t o ret u rn t o t h e

p ro p ert y

– n o r s t op p ed H y n es fro m rel o ck in g t he g at e t h e fo l l o wi n g m o rn i n g

. In s t ead

,

11W h i t ak er i g no red L en no n’ s ph o n e cal l an d Fi t zg eral d Farm s ’ c o m p l ai n t fo r a

t em p o rary res t rai n i ng o rd er, an d p ro c eed ed t o fi l e a cri m i n al arres t warran t ag ai n s t

Len no n t o k eep h i m o ff t h e pro p ert y

. Th e v erd i ct was s u p p ort ed b y t he reco rd

. See

S t i n es p r i ng v. Fi el d

s

, 1 3 9 Ga. Ap p

. 7 15

, 7 1 7 (1 ) (2 2 9 SE2 d 4 9 5 ) (1 9 7 6 ) (t ri al co u rt

co rrect ly d en i ed m o t io n fo r d irect ed v erd i ct wh ere th ere was ev id e n c e s u p p o rt i n g

rat i fi cat io n ).

2

. W h i t ak er Farm s nex t co n t en d s t h at t h ere i s n o ev i d en ce to s u p p o rt an award

o f at to rn ey fees u n d er OCGA § 1 3 -6 -1 1 b ecau s e (a) t h e award was b a s ed o n m ere

g u es swo rk ; (b ) th e as s o ci at e at t o rn ey rep res en t i n g Fi t zg eral d Farm s d i d n o t t es t i fy ;

an d (c) fees w ere award ed o n Fi t zg eral d Farm s ’ ab an do n ed cl ai m f o r u n ju s t

en ri ch m en t . W e d i s ag ree.

“ Un d er Geo rg ia l aw, ex p en s es o f l i t ig at i o n an d at t o rn ey fees m ay b e award ed

,

p u rs u an t t o OCGA § 1 3 -6 -1 1

, i f t he fact -fi n der d et erm i n es t h e d efen dan t h as act ed

i n b ad fai t h

, h as b een s tu b b o rn l y l i t i g i o u s

, o r h as cau s ed t h e p l ai n t i ff u n n eces s ary

t ro u b l e an d ex p en s e.” (Ci t at i o n

, p u n ct u at i o n a n d fo o tn o t e om i t t ed .) At l a n ta

Emer g en cy S vcs

. v. Cl a r

k

, 3 2 8 Ga. Ap p

. 9

, 1 3 (2 ) (7 6 1 SE2 d 4 3 7 ) (2 0 1 4 ). See al s o

Jo n es

, 2 5 7 Ga. Ap p

. at 8 0 9 (5 ). “ Th e q u es t i o n of at t o rn ey fees u n d er OCGA § 1 3 -6

-

1 1 i s a q u es t i o n fo r t h e ju ry .” KDS Pr o p er t i es v. S i ms

, 2 3 4 G a. Ap p

. 39 5

, 40 0 (5 ) (5 0 6

12SE2 d 9 0 3 ) (1 9 9 8). T h i s Co u rt w i l l affi rm s u ch an awa r d i f t h ere is an y ev i d en ce to

s u p p ort i t. See Mi

ze v. McGa ri t

y

, 2 9 3 Ga. Ap p

. 7 1 4

, 7 2 0 (6 ) (6 6 7 SE2 d 6 9 5 ) (2 0 0 8 )

(“ i n t en t i o n al t o rt o f t res p as s w i l l s u pp o rt a cl ai m fo r ex p en s es o f l i t i g at i o n an d

at t o rn ey fees u n der OCGA § 1 3-6 -1 1 [b ecau s e] t he i n t en t i on al n at ure o f t h e t res p as s

g i v es ri s e t o t h e b a d f

ai t h n eces s ary fo r s u ch reco very ”) (ci t at io n

, p u n ct u at i o n an d

fo o t n o t e o m i tt ed ).

Fi t zg eral d Farm s ’ p ri n ci p al at t o rn ey t es t i fi ed as t o h i s ex p eri en ce an d t h e

ex p eri en ce o f h i s as so ci at e wh o p erfo rm ed a m ajo ri t y o f t h e wo rk

, t h ei r bi l l i n g rat es

,

t h e n u m b er o f h o u rs b o t h sp en t o n t h e cas e, as wel l as t h e am o u n t an t i ci p at ed i n t ri al

f e e s

. He p res en t ed i n v o ices t o s u p p o rt th e fee req u es t

, s t at ed t hat t h e i ncu rred f e e s

were reas o n ab l e, an d ex p l ai n ed t h at t h e t o t al am o un t i n cl u d ed red u ct i on s fo r wo rk o n

t h e co u n t ercl ai m s as wel l as t h e cl ai m fo r u n ju s t en ri ch m en t

. Co u ns el fo r W h i t ak er

Farm s cro s s -ex am i n ed t h e at t o rn ey ab o u t t h e reas o n ab l en es s o f h i s rat es

.

Th ere was am

p l e ev i d en ce p res en t ed t o s u p p o rt t h e award

. Co u n s el t es t i fi ed as

t o h i s as s o ci at e’ s i n v o lv em en t an d co n fi rm ed t hat t h e fees d i d no t i n cl u d e t h e cl ai m

fo r u n ju s t en ri ch m en t

. As fo r W h i t ak er F a r m s ’ c o m p l ai n t t h at th e t ri al fees were

b as ed o n m ere g ues swo rk

, d efen s e-co u n s el n ev er cro ss -ex am i n ed o r ch al l en g ed t h e

at t o rn ey ’ s as s es sm en t o n t h i s is s u e. “ Si n ce t h i s [ t es t i m o ny ] was n ot o b ject ed t o o r

13co n tro v ert ed b y [W h i t ak er Farm s ]

, i t au t h o ri zed t h e ju ry t o fi n d t h at th e fee ch arg ed

was reas o n ab l e i n t hi s cas e.” Ca r p et Tr a n s p o r t v. Ken n et h Po ley In t er io rs , 2 1 9 Ga.

Ap p . 5 5 6 , 5 5 8 (2 ) (a) (4 6 6 SE2 d 7 0 ) (1 9 9 5).

3

. W h i t ak er Farm s l as t co m p l ai n s t h at t h e award of a t t o r n e y fees was

u n reas o nab l e b ecau s e i t was “ ex ces s i v e[l y ] o u t -o f-m ark et

. ” W e d i s ag ree.

It i s w el l es tab l i s h ed t h at a p art y ’ s “ at t o rn ey h i m s el f i s co m p et en t t o t es t i fy as

t o hi s o pi n io n o n reas o n ab l e fees .” (Ci t at io n an d p un ct u at i o n om i t t ed .) Ca mp b el l v.

Ba u sch

, 1 9 5 Ga. Ap p

. 7 9 1

, 79 2 (2 ) ( b ) ( 3 9 5 SE2 d 2 6 7 ) (1 9 90 ). Co m p are Gr a y v.

Ki n g

, 2 7 0 Ga. Ap p

. 8 5 5

, 8 5 8 (2 ) (b ) (6 0 8 SE2 d 3 2 0 ) (2 0 0 4 ) (n o ev i d en ce as to

reas on ab l en es s o f at t o rn ey fees p res en t ed ev en t h o u g h tes t im on y fro m o wn at t o rn ey

wo u l d h av e s u ffi ced ). As d i s cu s s ed i n Di vi s i o n 2 , s u p ra, Fi t zg eral d Farm s ’ co u n s el

t es t i fi ed t o h i s ex peri en ce an d h i s h o u rl y rat e, as wel l as th e ex peri en ce an d h o u rl y

rat e o f h i s as s o ci at e. He ex p l ai ned t h at t he as s o ci at e

, w h o was b i l led ou t at a l o wer

rat e, d i d a m ajo ri t y o f t h e wo rk i n t h e cas e, an d t es t i fi ed t h at h e s p eci al i zed in

ag ri cu l t u re l aw an d t h at t h e rat es ch arg ed were reas o n ab l e. On cro s s -ex am i n at i o n,

co u ns el ex p l ai n ed t h at h is rat es were reas o n ab l e g i v en t h e co m p l ex it y o f th e cas e an d

“ ag g res s i v e n at u re” o f t h e o p po n en t

. Th e tri al co urt red uced t h e am ou n t o f at t o rn ey

14fees award ed b y t h e ju ry t o t h e am o u nt req u es ted b y Fi t zg eral d Farm s an d p ro v ed by

co u ns el . Th e award was s up p o rt ed b y t h e ev id en ce an d was n o t u nreas o n ab l e.

Ca s e No . A1 8

A1 4 2 1

4

. In i t s cro s s-ap p eal

, Fi t zg eral d Farm s co n t en d s t h at t h e tri a l co u rt erred in

wi t h d rawi n g t h e i s s u e o f p u n i t i v e d am ag es fro m t h e ju ry an d i n refu s i ng t o i n s t ru ct

t h e ju ry o n p u n i ti v e d am ag es . W e ag ree.

(a) We fi rs t ad d res s W h i t ak er Farm s’ cl ai m t h at Fi t zg eral d Farm s ’

u n c o n d i t i o n al accep t an ce o f t h e red u ced ju d g m en t bars i t fro m as sert in g i t s cro s s

ap p eal u n d er In t er

Ag en cy, In c. v. Da n co Fi n a n ci a l Co r p

., 20 3 Ga. A p p

. 4 1 8, 4 2 9 (6 )

(4 1 7 SE2 d 4 6 ) (1 99 2 ) (p h y s i cal p reced en t o n l y ), ci t i n g S p ar ks v. Aet n a In s. Co

. , 6 2

Ga. 19 8 (1 8 7 9 ), an d co n cl u d e t hat t h e cro s s -ap p eal i s n o t b arred

. In In ter Ag en cy

, t h e

p l ai n t i ff/ cro s s -ap p el l an t accep t ed a wri t e-o ff o f t h e at t o rn ey fees award an d t h en

s o ug h t t o ap p eal t h e wri t e-o ff. In t h i s cas e, Fi t zg eral d Farm s is n o t ap p eal i n g t h e

red u ct i o n o f t h e at t o rn ey fees award t o wh i ch i t ag reed

. Rat her, i t i s ap p eal i n g t h e

i s su e o f p u n i t i v e d am ag es rel at ed t o i t s t res p as s cl ai m

, wh i ch i s i n n o w ay rel at ed to

i t s req ues t fo r at t o rn ey

fees u n d er OCGA § 1 3 -6 -1 1

.

F e de r a l law p ro v i d es g u i dan ce, al b ei t n o n -b i n d i n g, o n t h i s i s s ue. Fed eral c our ts

fo l l o w t h e l o n g s t an d i n g ru l e r ei t erat ed by t h e Su p rem e Co u rt i n D o n o va n v. Pen n

15S

h i p p i n g Co

. , 4 2 9 U. S. 6 4 8 (9 7 SCt 8 3 5

, 5 1 LE2 d 1 12 ) (1 9 7 7) (p er cu ri am ), “ t h at a

p l ai n t i ff i n fed eral co u rt

, wh et h er p ro s ecu t i n g a s t at e o r fed eral cau s e o f act i o n

, m ay

n o t a p peal fro m a rem i t t i t u r o rd er h e has accep t ed .” Id

. at 6 5 0 (2

, 3 ). Th e Do n o va n

ru l e, h owev er, “ d o es no t p rev en t t h e ap p eal o f i s s u es t h at are s ep arat e o r di s t i n ct fro m

t h e i s s ue o n wh i ch a p l ai n t i ff h as accep t ed a rem i t t i t u r.” Co h en v. Y a l e-New Ha ven

Ho s p

., 8 0 0 A2 d 4 9 9

, 50 4 (I) (Co n n

. 2 0 0 2 ) (d is m is s i n g ap p e a l w h ere p l ai n t i ff

accep t ed rem i t t i t u r red u ci n g n on -eco n o m i c, co m p en sat o ry d am ag e s j u dg m en t an d

t h en s o u g h t ad d i ti o n al no n -eco n o m i c, co m p en s at o ry d am ag es ). See Ut a h Fo a m

Pr o du ct s Co

. v. Up

j o h n Co

., 1 54 F3 d 1 2 1 2

, 1 21 6 (I) (1 0 t h Ci r. 1 9 9 8 ) (p o i n t i n g o ut

t h at Do n o va n p erm i ts p art y wh o h as accep t ed rem i tt i tu r o n o n e cau s e o f act i o n t o

ap p eal i ss u es rel at ed t o ot h er cau s es o f act i o n n o t s u b ject t o rem i tt i t u r o rd er). W h i l e

we reco g n i ze t h at a p lai n t i ff i n s t at e co u rt i s no t b o u n d b y Do no va n

, t h e rat i o n al e fo r

t h e ex cep t i o n t o it s ap p l i cat io n

, i s p ers u as iv e. W e t h erefo r e f i n d

, b as ed up o n t h e

p art i cu l ar fact s an d ci rcu m s tan ces o f t h i s cas e, t h at Fi t zg eral d Farm s ’ c l a i m fo r

at t o rn ey fees u nd er OCGA § 1 3 -6 -1 1 is s ep arat e an d d i s t i n ct fro m i t s cau s e o f act i o n

16fo r co m

p en s at ory an d p u n it iv e d am ag es b as ed on i t s t res p as s cl ai m

. A cco rd i n g l y

, we

reject W h i tak er Farm s ’ co n t en ti o n t h at t h i s cro s s -ap p eal i s b arred

. 7

(b ) Un d er OCGA § 5 1 -1 2 -5 .1 (b ), p un i t i v e dam ag es m ay b e award ed i n to rt

ac t i o n s wh ere “ i t i s p ro v en b y cl ear an d co n v i n ci n g ev i d en ce t hat t h e d efen d an t ’ s

act i on s s ho wed wi l l fu l m i s co n d u ct

, m a l i ce, frau d

, w an t o nn es s

, o p p res s io n

, o r t h at

en t i re wan t o f care wh i ch wo u l d rai s e t h e p res u m pt i o n o f co ns ci o us i n d i fferen ce t o

co n seq u en ces .” “ A co n s ci o us i n d i fferen ce t o co n s eq uen ces rel at es t o an i nt en t i o n al

d i s reg ard o f t h e ri gh t s o f an o th er.” Tyl er v. Li nco l n

, 2 72 Ga. 1 1 8

, 1 2 0 (1 ) (5 2 7 SE2 d

1 8 0 ) (2 00 0 ). See al s o Og l et h o r p e Po wer Co r

p

. v. Sh er i f f

, 2 1 0 Ga. Ap p. 29 9

, 3 0 1 (4 )

(a) (4 3 6 SE2 d 1 4) (1 99 3 ). Tres p as s i s an i n t en ti o nal act wh i ch wi l l au th ori ze a cl ai m

fo r p u n it i v e d am ag es

. See Tyl er

, 2 7 2 G a

. at 1 2 0 (1 ). “ Ord i n ari l y

, t h e im p o s i t i o n o f

p u n i t i v e dam ag es i s a qu es t io n fo r t h e ju ry .” Ba u m an n v. S n i d er

, 2 4 3 Ga. Ap p

. 5 2 6,

5 3 0 (3 ) (5 3 2 SE2 d 4 68 ) (2 0 0 0 ).

Th e act i o n s t ak en b y W h i t ak er Farm s an d i t s o wn er, as l ai d o u t i n Di v i s i o n 1,

s u p ra, are s u ffi ci en t ev i d en ce o f “ co n s ci o u s in d i fferen ce” t o au th o ri ze a ju ry t o award

p u n i t i v e d am ag es

. See Ba u m a nn

, 2 4 3 Ga. A p p

. at 5 3 0 -5 31 (3 ) (rev ers in g g ran t o f

7 Had Fi t zg eral d Farm s accep t ed a red u ced co m p en s at o ry d am ag es award o u r

co n cl u s i o n m i g h t b e d i fferen t

.

17m o ti o n fo r d i rect ed v erd ict o n p l a i n t i ff’ s cl ai m fo r pu n i t i v e dam ag es i n act i o n fo r

t res pas s ); T. G. & Y

. S t or es Co

. v. W

a t er s

, 1 7 5 Ga. Ap p

. 8 8 4, 88 7 -8 8 8 (3 ) (3 3 4 SE2 d

9 1 0 ) (1 9 8 5 ) (affi rm i n g d en i a l o f m o t i on fo r d irect ed v erd i ct o n cl ai m fo r p u n i t i v e

d am ag es i n act io n fo r t res p as s ). See al s o La n g l o i s v. W o l f or d

, 2 4 6 Ga. Ap p

. 2 0 9

, 2 1 0

-

2 1 2 (1 ) (5 3 9 SE2 d 5 65 ) (2 0 0 0 ) (af f i r m i n g d en i al o f m o ti o n fo r d i rect ed v erd i ct o n

p u n i t i v e d am ag es cl ai m ). W h i t ak er al l o wed t h e g at es t o Fi t zg eral d Farm s ’ orch ard to

rem ai n l o ck ed wh i l e Fi t zg eral d Farm s’ p each h arv es t ro t t ed

, an d h e n o t o nl y refu s ed

t o u nl o c k t h e g at es d es p i t e Len n o n ’ s p leas t o fi n i s h h arv es t i ng t h e p each es

, b ut

s o u g ht to h av e Len n o n arres t ed an d k ep t h i m o ff th e pro p ert y t o p rev en t Fi t zg eral d

Farm s fro m co m

p let i n g t h e h arv es t

. Th e t ri al co u rt ’ s ru l in g o n t h i s i s s u e i s rev ers ed

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r med i n Ca s e No . A1 8

A1 4 2 0 ; r ever

s ed i n Ca s e No

. A1 8

A1 4 2 1.

Mi l l er , P. J., a n d

Go ss , J., co n cu r

.

18