THI RD DI VI SI ON

DI L LA RD, P. J.

, GOBEI L and HODGES, 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

October 24, 2019



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 9 A0 82 6 . W A RD v . M ARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC.

H O D G E S , J u d g e.

Pl ai n t i ff Th el m a W ard (“ W ard ”), o n b eh al f o f h er d e ced en t s p o u s e, J i m m i e

W ard

, ap p eal s fro m a t ri al co u rt o rd er g ran ti n g M arri o tt In t ern at i o n al

, I n c.’ s

( “ M arri o t t ”) m ot io n t o d i s m i s s fo r l ack o f pers o n al j u ri s d i ct i o n an d effect i v el y

d en y i n g h er m o t i o n fo r d efau l t ju d g m en t

. Becau s e t h e t ri al co u rt i m p ro perl y ap p l i ed

ex i s t in g l aw g ov ern i n g p ers o n al ju ri s di ct i o n in G eo r g i a a n d al l o wed M arri o t t to

ci rcu m v e n t th e s t ri ct req u i rem en t s t o o p en d efau l t, we rev ers e t h e d i s m i s sal o f t h i s

cas e an d rem an d t o t h e t ri al co u rt t o p ro ceed wi t h W ard ’ s m o ti o n fo r en t ry o f d efau l t

ju d g m en t

.

Th e reco rd s h o w s t h at o n Au g u s t 2 9

, 2 0 1 7

, W ard

, a Geo rg i a res i d en t

, s u ed

M a r r i o t t i n Co b b Co u n t y St at e Co u rt fo r s i m p l e n eg li g en ce an d n eg li g en ce p er s eaft er a h an di cap s h ower s eat b ro k e

, c a u s i n g J i m m i e t o s u ffer in

ju ri es

. Th e i n

ju ri es

were s u s tai n ed at a M arri o t t h o t el i n Tex as . W ard ’ s co m p l ai n t al l eg ed t h at

Defen d an t M arri o t t

. . . i s a co rp o rat i on d u l y reg i s t ered t o co n d uct

b u s i n es s i n t h e St at e o f G eo rg i a. It i s s u b je c t t o t he ju ri s d ict i o n o f t h i s

Co u rt an d m ay be s erv ed t h ro u g h i t s reg i st ered ag en t

, Co rp o rat e

Creat i o n s Net wo rk I n c. at 2 9 8 5 Go rd y Park way

, 1 s t Fl o o r, Co b b

, M ari et t a, Geo rg i a 3 0 0 6 6 , USA.

An affi d av i t o f s erv i ce i n d i cat es t h at M arri ot t was p ers o n al l y s e rv ed t h ro u g h an

au t h o ri zed ag en t at t hat ad d res s o n Au gu s t 3 0 , 2 0 1 7

.

M arri o t t fai l ed to an s wer t h e c o m p l ai n t

, an d on No v em

b er 1

, 2 0 1 7

, W ard

m o ved fo r t h e en t ry

o f d efau l t ju d g m en t

. Th e fo l lo wi n g d ay

, M arri o tt an s wered t h e

co m p l ai n t an d as s ert ed a n u m

ber o f d efen s es

, i n cl u d in g l ack o f p ers o n al ju ri s d i ct i o n.

Th e an s wer cl ai m ed t hat M arri o t t was “ wi t h o u t s u ffi ci en t i n fo rm at io n t o fo rm a b el i ef

as t o t h e t ru t hfu ln es s o f th e al l eg at io n s co nt ai n ed i n ” m an y p arag rap h s o f t h e

co m p l ai n t

. M arri o t t al s o s erv ed W ard wi t h in t erro gat o ri es an d req u es t s fo r t h e

p ro d uct i o n o f d o cu m en t s

.

On No v em

b er 2 1, 2 01 7

, t h ree week s aft er W ard m o v ed fo r t h e en t ry o f d efau l t

,

M arri o tt fi l ed a n um

ber o f d o cu m en t s : an am en d ed an s wer, a d em an d fo r ju ry t ri al

,

a req u es t fo r d i s co v ery t h at ad m i t t ed M arri o t t was i n d efau l t fo r fai l in g t o t i m el y fi l e

an an swer, an d

, m o s t i m

p o rt an t l y fo r p u rp o s es of th i s ap p eal

, a m o t i o n t o d i sm i s s fo r

2l ack o f p ers o n al j u ri s d i ct i o n

. W ard op p o s ed t h e m ot i o n t o d i sm i s s an d m o v ed t o s t ri k e

M arri o tt ’ s an s wer. Fo l lo wi n g o ral arg u m en t o n t h e p en d i n g m o t i o n s

, th e tri al co u rt

g r a n t e d M arri o t t’ s m o t i on t o d i s m is s fo r l ack of pers o n al ju ri s di ct io n

, effect i v el y

d en y i n g W ard ’ s m o t i o n fo r d efau l t ju d g m en t

. In th ree rel at ed e n u m e r a t i o n s

, W ard

ch al l en g es t h e p ro p ri et y o f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f M arri o t t ’ s m o ti o n t o d i s m i s s an d

d en ial o f h er m o t i o n fo r d efau l t ju d g m en t

.

Th i s cas e p res en t s t h e fo ll o wi n g ju ri sd i ct i o n al i s s u e: Can a fo rei g n co rp o rat i o n

reg i s tered an d au t h o ri zed t o d o b u s i n es s i n Geo rg i a av o id d efau l t b y fi li n g a m o t i o n

t o d i s m i s s fo r lack o f p ers o n al ju ri s d i ct i o n aft er it s t i m e t o o p e n d efau l t as a m at t er

o f ri g ht h as p as s ed ? A t h o ro u g h an al y s i s of ex i st i ng Geo rg ia d efau l t an d p ers o n al

ju ri s d i ct i o n l aw m an dat es t h at we an s wer t h e q u es t i o n i n t h e n eg at iv e.

1

. Geo r g ia d ef au l t l a w

. Un d er Geo rg i a l aw, a d efen d an t m u s t an s wer a

co m p l ai n t wi t h i n 3 0 day s aft er s erv i ce o f t he s u m m o n s an d co m

p l ai n t u po n i t

, u n l es s

o t h erwi s e p ro v i d ed b y s t at u e. OCGA § 9 -1 1-1 2 (a). Fa i l u r e to d o s o res ul t s i n an

au t o m at i c d efau l t :

If i n an y cas e an an s wer h as n o t b een fi l ed wi th i n t h e t i m e req ui red b y

t h i s ch ap t er, t h e cas e s h al l au t o m at ical l y b eco m e i n d e f a u l t u n l es s th e

t i m e fo r fi l i n g t he an s wer h as b een ex t e n d e d a s p ro vi d ed b y l aw. T he

d efau l t m ay b e o p en ed as a m at t er o f ri g h t b y t h e fi l i n g o f s uch d efen ses

wi t h in 1 5 d ay s o f t h e d ay o f d efau l t

, u p o n t h e p ay m en t o f co s t s. If th e

3cas e i s s t i l l i n d efau l t aft er t h e e x p i rat i o n o f t he p eri o d o f 1 5 d ay s

, th e

p l ai n t i ff at an y t im e t h ereaft er s h al l b e en ti t led t o v erd i ct an d ju d g m en t

b y d efau l t, i n o p en co u rt o r i n ch am b ers

, as i f ev ery i t em an d p arag rap h

o f t h e co m

p l ai n t o r o t her o ri g i n al p l ead i n g were s u p po rt ed b y p ro p er

ev i d en ce[.]

OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 5 (a). A cco rd i n g l y

, b ecau s e Marri o t t fai l ed t o an s wer t h e co m p l ai nt

fo r 6 4 d ay s

, W ard was au t o m at i cal l y en ti t l ed t o d efau l t j u d gm en t as i f ev ery i t em an d

p arag rap h o f h er co m

p l ai n t were s u pp o rt ed b y p ro per ev i d en ce. 1 See S i d wel l v.

S i d wel l

, 2 3 7 Ga. Ap p

. 7 1 6

, 7 1 7 (1 ) (5 1 5 SE2 d 6 3 4 ) (1 9 9 9 ). In fact

, Marri o t t ad m i t t ed

i n i t s s u b s eq u en t l y fi l ed req u es t fo r d i s c o v e r y t h at “ [t ] h e ab o v e-s t y l ed cas e i s in

d efau l t as [M arri o t t ] fai l ed t o fi l e a t i m el y An s w er.”

1 Marri o t t co rrect l y p o i n t s o u t t h at “ wh i l e a d efau l t op erat es as an ad m i s s i o n

o f t he wel l -p l ed fact ual al l eg at i o n s i n a co m pl ai n t

, i t d o es n ot ad m i t t h e l eg al

co n cl u s i o n s co n tai n ed t h erei n

. ” (Ci t at i o n om i t t ed .) F i n k v. Do d

d

, 2 8 6 Ga. Ap p

. 3 6 3,

3 6 5 (1 ) ( 6 4 9 SE2 d 3 5 9 ) (2 0 0 7). Us i n g t h i s p ri n ci pl e, M arri o t t arg u es t hat W ard ’ s

as s ert i o n i n h er co m

p l ai nt reg ard i n g ju ri s d ict i o n i s a l eg al co n cl u si o n an d

, t herefo re,

W ard was n o t en t it l ed t o d efau lt o n t h e ju ri s d i ct i o n al i s s ue. Ho wev er, as wi ll b e m o re

t h o ro u g hl y ex p l ai ned in D ivision 2 ( a )

, W a r d’ s co m p lai n t i n cl u ded t h e fo l l owi n g fact s

s u ffi ci en t t o s u p po rt j u ri s d i ct i o n an d W ard ’ s req u es t fo r d efau l t : Marri o t t i s a

co rp o rat i o n d u l y reg i s t ered to co n d u ct b u s i n es s i n t h e St at e of Geo rg i a an d co u l d b e

s e r v ed th ro u g h i t s reg is t ered ag en t i n Geo rg i a. See, e.g

., Al l en v. Al l st o n

, 1 4 1 Ga

. Ap p

. 5 7 2

, 5 7 4 (2 ) (2 3 4 SE2 d 1 5 2 ) (1 9 7 7 ) (“ Here th e d efen d an t was p ers o n al l y s erv ed

i n Fu l t o n Co u n t y ; t h e co m p l ai n t al l eg ed th at h e was a res i d en t o f Fu l t o n Co u n t y an d

h i s fai l u re t o fi l e res po n s iv e p l ead in g s ad m i t t ed al l wel l p l ead ed al l eg at i o n s i n cl u d i n g

t h i s o n e.”).

4“ Aft er t h e 15 -d ay g race p eri o d fo r o p en i n g d efau l t as a m at t er o f ri g h t u n d e r

OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 5 (a), a t ri al co u rt h as no d i s cret i o n t o o pen d efau lt ” u n l es s t h e

d efen d an t co m

p l i es wi th th e co n d i t io n s of OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 5 (b ). (Ci t at i on o m i t t ed .)

S a ma d i v. Fed

. Ho me Mo r t g a g e Lo a n

, 34 4 Ga. Ap p

. 1 1 1

, 1 1 5 (1 ) (8 0 9 SE2 d 6 9 )

(2 0 1 7). In ad d i t i o n, i f d efau l t i s n o t o p en ed

, t h e i s s u e of l i ab i l it y i s co n cl ud ed

, an d t h e

o n l y i ss u e a defen dan t can d efen d ag ai n s t is t h e am o u n t o f d am ag es

. Fl a n d er s v. Hi l l

Ai r cr a f t & Lea s in g Co r

p

. , 1 3 7 Ga. Ap p

. 2 8 6

, 28 7 (2 2 3 SE2 d 4 8 2 ) (1 9 7 6 ) (rev ers i n g

t ri al co urt

, wh i ch al l owed a defau l t i n g d efen d an t to p res en t ev i d en ce reg ard i n g t h e

ri gh t o f reco v ery ).

Th at b ei n g s ai d, d ef

a u l t m a y b e o p en ed at th e d i s cret i on o f t h e t ri al co u rt i f

cert ai n req u i rem en ts are m et :

A t a n y t i m e b efo re fi n al ju d g m en t

, th e co u rt

, i n i t s di s cret io n

, u p o n

p ay m en t o f co s t s, m ay al l o w t h e defau l t t o b e o p en ed fo r pro v i d en t i al

cau s e prev en t i n g t h e fi l i n g of req u i red pl ead i n g s o r f o r ex cu s ab l e

n eg l ect o r wh er e t h e ju d g e, fro m al l t h e fact s

, s h al l d et erm i ne t h at a

p ro p er cas e has b een m ad e fo r t h e d efau l t t o b e o p en ed , o n t erm s t o be

f i x ed b y t h e co u rt

. In o rd er t o al lo w t h e d efau l t to b e t h us o p en e d

, t h e

s h o wi n g s h al l b e m a d e u n d e r o at h, s h al l set up a m eri to ri ou s d efen s e,

s h al l o ffer t o p l ead in s t an t er, an d s h al l an n o un ce read y t o p ro ceed w i t h

t h e t ri al

.

OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 5 (b ).

5Here, M arri o tt fi l ed an an s wer, am en d ed an swer, d i s co very req u es t s

, d em an d

fo r ju ry t ri al

, an d a m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s

. In it s req u es t f o r d i s co v ery

, Marri ot t al l eg ed

i t fi led a m o ti o n t o o p en d efau lt

, b u t i t i s u n d i s p u t ed t h a t n o s u ch m o ti o n was ev er

fi led

. In fact

, t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er i n d i cat es th at M arri o t t “ h as rep eat ed l y s t at ed t h at

t h ey d o n o t n eed t o o p en Defau l t b ecau s e t h ere i s n o j u ri sd i ct i o n .” W e th u s t u rn t o an

o v erv i ew o f Geo rg i a’ s p ers o nal ju ri s d i ct i o n l aw.

2

. Geo r gi a per s o na l j u r i s d i ct i o n l a w

. In G eo rg i a, “ [a] l l o wi n g a cas e t o g o to

d efau l t ju d g m en t i s n o bet t er t h an al l o wi n g a c a s e t o b e t ri ed o n t h e m eri t s b efo re

co m i n g i n wi t h a t ech ni cal d efen s e.” (Ci t at io n o m i tt ed

. ) Co t t o n v. Ru ck

, 1 5 7 Ga. Ap p.

8 2 4 (2 78 SE2 d 6 9 3 ) (1 98 1 ). Th u s

, a p ro p erl y serv ed defen d an t wh o wi sh es t o rel y o n

an affi rm at i v e defen s e, s u ch as lack o f p ers o n al ju ri s d ict i o n o r v en u e, 2 m u s t as s ert t h e

d efe n s e i n a ti m el y fi l ed an s wer o r i n a m o t i o n to di s m i s s p ri o r t o d efau l t

. See i d.

“ W h en t h e p art y h as recei v ed act u al n o t i ce o f t h e s u i t t h ere i s n o d ue p ro ces s p ro b l em

i n req u iri n g h i m t o o b

j ect t o t h e i m

p ro per [ju ri s d i c t i o n or] ven u e wi t h i n t h e p eri o d

2 “ J u ri sd i ct i o n o f t h e p ers o n i s t he p o w e r o f a c o u rt t o ren d er a p ers o n al

ju d g m en t

, o r t o s ub

ject t h e p art i es i n a p art i cu l ar cas e t o t h e d eci si o n s an d ru l i ng s

m ad e b y i t i n s u ch a cas e, an d i s o b t ai n ed b y s erv i n g th e p ro p er p ro ces s i n t h e m an n er

req u i red b y l aw o n p ers o n s o r p art i es su b ject t o b e su ed i n a p art i cu l ar act i o n

. . . . Ven ue m ean s t h e p l ace o f t ri al .” (Ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at i on o m i t t ed

. ) Eu l er -S i a c

S .P.A. (Cr ea ma r S

p a ) v. Dr a m a Ma r bl e C o

. , 2 7 4 Ga

. Ap p

. 25 2

, 2 5 5 (1 ), n

. 5 (6 1 7

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

6p res cri bed [.] ” (Ci t at i o n an d p un ct u at i o n o m it t ed .) W i l l i a ms v. Mel ls

, 13 8 Ga. Ap p

. 6 0

(2 2 5 SE2 d 5 0 1 ) (1 9 7 6) (p h y si cal p reced en t o n l y ); Ai ken v. Byn u m

, 12 8 Ga. Ap p

. 2 1 2,

2 1 3 (2 ) (1 9 6 SE2 d 1 80 ) (1 9 7 3 ) (p h y s i cal p reced en t o n l y ); cf. Un i t ed Gr o cer y Ou t l et

v. Ben n et t

, 2 9 2 Ga. Ap p

. 3 6 3

, 3 6 5 (6 6 5 SE2 d 2 7 ) ( 2 0 0 8 ) (ci t in g p ri n ci p l e fro m

W i l l ia ms ).

a. Res i d en t d ef en d a n t s

. To ci rcu m

v en t Geo rg i a d efau lt an d p ers o n al

ju ri s d i ct i o n l aw, i n cl ud i n g i t s fai l u re t o req u es t th at d efau l t b e o p e n ed an d co m p l y

wi t h t h e r eq u i rem en ts o f OCGA § 9 -1 1-5 5 (b ), Marri o t t arg ues t h at t h e l aw s t at ed

ab o ve d o es n o t ap p l y t o fo rei g n

, n o n res i d en t co rp o rat io n s

. Fi rs t o f al l

, co n t rary to

M a rri o t t ’ s as s ert i o n i n t h is cas e, M arri o t t is co ns i d ered a res i den t cor por a t e de f e nda nt,

as op p o s ed to a no n res id en t co rp o rat e d efen d an t

, u n d er ex i s t i n g Geo rg i a l aw. A

n o n res i d en t co rp o rat i o n i s d efi n e d

, i n p art

, u n der t h e Geo rg i a Lo n g A rm St at u t e as

“ a co rp o rat i o n wh i ch i s n o t o rg an i zed o r ex i s t i n g un d er t h e l aws o f t h is st at e an d i s

n o t au th o ri zed t o d o o r t ran s act b u s i n es s i n t h i s s t at e at t h e t i m e a cl ai m o r cau s e o f

act i on u n d er Co d e Sect i o n 9 -1 0 -9 1 ari s es

. ” OCG A § 9 -1 0 -9 0

. Bo t h t h e Geo rg i a

Su p rem e Co u rt an d t h i s Co u rt p rev i ou s ly h av e h el d t h at t h e Geo rg i a Lo n g Arm

S t a t u t e d o es n o t ap p l y t o co rp o rat i o n s au t h o ri zed to d o bu s i nes s i n G eo rg i a

. S e e

Al l s t at e In s

. Co

. v. Kl ei n

, 2 6 2 G a

. 5 9 9, 6 0 0 -6 0 1 (4 22 SE2 d 86 3 ) (1 9 9 2 ) (fo rei g n

7co rp o rat i o n au t h o ri zed t o d o b u s i n es s i n t h i s St at e i s n ot a “ no n res id en t ” fo r p u rp o s es

o f p ers o n al ju ri s d i ct i on as th at t erm i s d efi n ed i n t h e Lo n g A r m S t a t u t e); Ch er okee

W a r eh o u s es v. Ba b b Lu mb er Co

. , 2 4 4 Ga. A p p

. 1 9 7

, 1 9 9 (5 3 5 SE2 d 2 5 4 ) (2 0 0 0 )

(s am e; cas e i n v o l v ed a Ten n es s ee co rp o rat i o n t h at was r e g i s t ered t o do b u s i n es s in

Geo rg i a an d m ai n t ai n ed a reg i s t ered ag en t i n Geo rg i a fo r s erv i ce o f p ro ces s ); s ee al s o

In n o va t i ve Cl i n i ca l & Co ns u lt i n g Ser vs

. v. Fi r s t Na t. Ba n k o

f Am es

, Io wa

, 2 7 9 Ga.

6 7 2

, 6 7 4

, n

. 2 (6 2 0 SE2 d 3 5 2 ) (2 0 0 5 ) (n ot i n g t h at t h e Kl ei n cas e i n v o l v ed

“ ju ri s d i ct i o n ov er a d efen d an t wh o was a Geo rg i a res i d en t s o t h at OCGA § 9 -1 0 -9 1

was wh o ll y

i n ap p l i cab l e”).

As a res id en t

, s u ch a fo rei g n co rp o rat io n m ay s u e or b e su ed to t he s am e

ex t en t as a d o m es t i c co rp o rat i o n

. Th erefo re, a p lai n t i ff wi s h i n g to su e i n

Geo rg i a a co rp o rat i on au t h o ri zed t o d o b u s i n es s i n Geo rg i a i s n o t

res t ri ct ed b y t h e p ers o n al ju ri s d i ct i o n p aram et ers of § 9- 1 0 -9 1

, i n cl u d i n g

t h e req ui rem en t th at a cau s e o f act i on ari se o ut o f a d efen d an t ’ s

act i v i t i es wi t h in t h e s t at e.

Kl ei n , 2 62 Ga. at 6 0 1

.

As t h e Geo rg ia Su p rem e Co u rt n o t ed

, t h is co n cl u s i o n i s co ns i s t en t w i t h OCGA

§ 1 4 -2 -1 5 0 5

, wh i ch s et s fo rt h t h e s t at u t o ry effect o f a cert i fi cat e o f au t h o ri t y t o d o

b u s i n es s i n Geo rg i a:

A fo rei g n co rp o rat i o n w i t h a v al i d cert ifi cat e o f au t h o ri t y h as th e s am e

b u t n o g reat er ri g h ts u n d er t h i s ch ap t er an d has th e s am e b u t n o g reat er

8p ri v il eg es u n d er t h i s ch ap t er as

, an d ex cep t as o t h e rwi s e pro v i d ed b y

t h i s ch ap ter i s s ub

ject t o t h e s a m e d ut i es

, res t ri ct i o n s

, pen al t i es

, an d

l i ab i l i t i es n o w or l at er i m p o sed o n

, a d o m e s t i c co rp orat i on o f l ik e

ch aract er. [§ 1 4 -2 -1 5 0 5 (b ).]

Kl ei n

, 2 6 2 Ga. at 60 1

, n

. 2

. It a l s o c o m p o rt s wi t h t h e req u i rem en t s o f fed eral

p ro ced ural d u e p ro ces s :

[I] f an au t h o ri zed rep res en t at i v e o f a fo rei g n co rp o rat i o n b e p h y s i cal l y

p res en t i n t h e s t a t e o f t h e fo ru m an d b e th ere en g ag ed i n act i v i t i es

ap p ro p ri at e t o accep ti n g s erv i ce o r recei v i n g n o t i ce o n i t s b eh al f, we

reco gn i ze t hat t h ere i s n o u n fai rn es s i n s u b ject i n g t hat co rp o rat i o n t o th e

ju ri s di ct i o n o f t h e co u rt s o f t h at s t at e t hro u g h s u ch s erv i ce o f p ro ces s

u p o n t h at rep res en t at i v e. W e fi n d n o req u i rem en t o f fed eral d u e p ro ces s

t h at ei t h er p r o h i b i t

s a s t at e fro m o p en i n g it s co u rt s t o a cau s e o f act i o n

n o t ari s i n g o u t o f t h e c o rp o rat i o n ’ s act i v i t i es in t h e st at e o r co mp el s a

s t at e t o d o s o

.

(Pu n ct u at i on o m i t t ed ; em

p h as i s i n o ri g i n al .) Id

. at 6 0 1

, n

. 3 (ci t i n g Per ki n s v. Ben g u et

Co n s o l i da t ed Mi n i n g Co

. , 3 4 2 U. S. 4 3 7

, 4 4 4, 4 46 (7 2 SCt 4 1 3

, 9 6 LEd 4 8 5 ) (1 9 5 2 )).

M arri o t t ci t es a n u m

b er o f Un i t ed St at es Su p rem e Co u rt cas es an d fed eral cas es

t o s u p p o rt i t s arg um en t t h at a fo r e ig n co rp o rat i on reg i s t ered an d au th o ri zed t o d o

b u s i n es s i n a s tat e i s n o t a res i d en t fo r p u rp o s es o f an al y zi n g ju ri s d i ct i on

. H o wev er,

t h e fed eral cas es ci t ed b y M arri o t t are n o n b i n di n g o n t h i s Co u rt

. Th e Geo rg i a

Su p rem e Co u rt h as h el d t h at

t h e [fed eral co u rt s’ ] i n t erp ret at i o n o f [a s t at u t e] i s n ot bi n d i n g o n t h i s

Co u rt an d i t i s n o t n eces sary fo r th i s Co u rt t o co rrect erro n eo us Fed eral

9i n t erp ret at i o n s o f o u r St at e’ s s t at u t es fo r t h e p reced en t i al v al u e o f o u r

o p i n i o n s t o rem ai n t h e co n t ro l l i n g au t h o ri t y o n t he p ro p er i n t erp ret at i o n

o f t h o se s tat u t es

.

In n o va t i ve Cl i n i ca l

& Co n s u l t i n g

S er vs

. , 2 7 9 Ga. at 6 7 4

, n . 2

.

M o reo v er, as an i n t erm ed i at e ap p el l at e co u rt

, w e are b o u nd by Geo rg i a s t at u t es

an d Geo rg i a Su p rem e Co urt d eci s i on s

. “ W h en t h e Su p rem e Co u rt h as ad d res s ed an

i s su e i n cl ear t erm s

, t hi s co u rt i s n o t at l i bert y t o decl i n e t o fo l l ow th e es t ab l i sh ed ru l e

o f l aw.” S t a t e v. Ben t o n

, 1 6 8 Ga. Ap p

. 66 5

, 6 6 7 (2 ) (3 1 0 SE2 d 2 4 3 ) (1 9 8 3); s ee al s o

Th o ma so n v. Ha r

per

, 16 2 Ga. Ap p

. 44 1

, 4 4 4 -4 4 5 (2 ) (2 8 9 SE2 d 7 73 ) (1 9 82 ) (“ Th i s

co u rt i s n o t at l ib ert y t o d e c l i n e t o fo l lo w t h i s ru l e o f l aw i n Geo rg i a b ecau s e o u r

Su p rem e Co u rt h as ad d res s ed t h e i s s u e i n cl ear t erm s .”). Art i cl e VI, Sect i o n VI,

Parag rap h VI o f t h e Geo rg i a Co n s t i t u t i o n o f 1 9 8 3 s p eci fi cal l y c o m m an d s

, “ [t ] h e

d eci s i o n s o f t he Su p rem e Co urt s h al l b in d al l o t h er co u rt s as p reced en t s .” Th i s

“ p ri n ci p l e h as ev en g reat er wei g h t wh ere t he p reced en t rel at es t o i n t erp ret at i o n o f a

s t at u te. On ce t h e [Su p rem e] co u rt i n t erp ret s t he s t at u t e, t h e in t erp ret at io n h as b eco m e

an i n t eg ral p art o f t h e s t at u te.” (Ci t at i o n s an d pu n ct uat i on o m i tt ed .) Ben to n

, 1 6 8 Ga.

Ap p

. at 6 6 7 (2 ). “ Th u s, n o t wi t h s t an d i ng t he p o s s i b l e d es i rab i l i t y o f t h e ru l e u rg ed by

[M arri o t t ]

, we are fo recl o s ed fro m co n s i derat i o n o f i t at t hi s t im e.” Id .; s ee al s o A &

10A Hea ti n g & Ai r Co n di t i o n in g Co

. v. Bu r ges s

, 1 4 8 G a. Ap p

. 8 5 9

, 8 6 0 (1 ) (2 5 3 SE2 d

2 4 6 ) (1 9 7 8 ). 3

Becau s e ex i s t i ng Geo rg i a l aw l ead s u s t o co n cl u d e t h at M arri o t t i s a res i d en t

d efen d an t co rp o rat i o n fo r d efau l t an d p ers o nal ju ri s di ct i o n p u rp o s es

, s ee Kl ei n

, 2 6 2

Ga. at 6 01

, M arri o t t w as req u i red t o co m p l y wi t h Geo rg ia d efau l t an d p ers o n al

ju ri s d i ct i o n l aw. Th i s i n cl ud ed an o b l i g at i o n t o as s ert i t s affi rm at i v e d efen s es , s u ch

as l ack o f p ers o n al ju ri s di ct i o n, i n a t i m el y fi l ed an s wer o r i n a m o t i o n t o d i s m i ss

p ri o r t o d efau l t

. See Co t t o n

, 15 7 Ga. Ap p. at 8 2 4. In t h e al t ern at i v e, M arri o t t co u ld

h av e m o v ed t o o p en d efau l t an d co m p l i ed w i t h t h e s t ri ct req u i rem en t s o f O CGA § 9

-

1 1 -5 5 ( b )

. Marri o tt di d n o n e o f t h es e. “ By erro n eo u s l y d i s m i s s in g [W ard ’ s ]

co m p l ai n t

, t h e t ri al co u rt en ab l ed [M arri o t t ] t o ci rcu m ven t th e s tri ct req u i rem en t s fo r

o p en in g d efau l t .” S i d

wel l , 2 3 7 Ga. Ap p

. at 7 1 7-7 1 8 (1 ).

b

. N o nr es i d en t d ef en d a n t s

. M oreo v er, ev en i f M arri o tt w ere co n s i d ered a

fo rei gn

, n o n res i d en t co rp o rat i o n

, t h i s Co urt h as p rev i o u s l y hel d t hat

, i n G eo rg i a, ev en

3 To t h e ex ten t M arri o tt ch al l en g es t he co n st i t u t i o n al i t y o f Geo rg i a’ s s t at u t es

o r cas e l aw, i t s f

a i l u r e t o rai s e t h i s i s s ue b el ow p recl u des o u r rev i ew o f an y

co n st i t u t io n al cl ai m

. See In th e In t er es t o f A. A.

, 2 5 3 Ga. A p p

. 8 58

, 8 6 2 (3 ) (5 6 0 SE2 d

7 6 3 ) (2 00 2 ) (“ A co ns t i t u t i o n al i s s u e can n o t b e co ns i d ered w h en as sert ed fo r t h e fi rs t

t i m e o n ap p eal b u t m

u st b e cl earl y rai s ed i n t h e t ri al co u rt an d d i s t i n ct l y ru l ed u p o n

t h ere.”) (ci t at i on o m i t t ed ).

11a n o n res i d en t d efen d an t wai v es h i s ri g h t to as s ert d efen s es

, i n cl u d i n g t h e d efen s e o f

l ack o f p ers o n al ju ri s d ict i o n

, b y fa i l i ng t o t i m el y res p o n d t o t h e co m p l ai nt o r m o v e

t o o p en defau l t

. See S t o u t v. S i g n a t e Ho l d i n g

, 1 8 4 G a. Ap p

. 15 4

, 1 5 5 (3 ) (3 6 1 SE2 d

3 6 ) (1 9 8 7) (Cal i fo rn i a res i d en t s erv ed un d er t h e l o n g-arm s t at u t e wai v ed ri g h t to

co n tes t Geo rg i a co u rt ’ s ju ri s d i ct i o n b y fai l i n g to t i m el y an s wer co m p l ai n t o r m o v e to

o p en defau l t ). Li k ewi s e, i n Ch en v. Al exa n d er Ter r y As s o cs

. , 2 2 8 G a. A p p

. 34 5

, 3 4 6

-

3 4 7 (4 91 SE2 d 8 3 4 ) (1 9 9 7 ), we s p eci fi cal l y n o t ed t h at a n on reside nt defen d an t can n ot

as s ert a lack o f ju ri s d i ct i o n wh i l e in d efau l t; t he defen d an t m u st fi l e a t i m el y m o t i o n

t o di s m i ss o r as s ert a lack o f p ers o n al ju ri s d i ct i o n d efen s e b y m o v i n g t o o pen d efau l t

,

m o vi n g t o s et as id e t h e ju d g m e n t

, o r fi l i n g a s u b s eq u en t co l l at eral at t ack

. W h i l e

M arri o tt arg ues t h at req u i ri ng a d efen d an t t o m o v e t o o p en d efau l t o r fi l e a m o t i o n to

s et as i d e aft er a d efau l t ju dg m en t h as b een award ed i n o rd er t o a s s e r t a l ack o f

ju ri s d i ct i o n

, rat h er th an s i m p l y al l o wi n g i t t o rai s e t h e i s s u e vi a an u n t i m el y m o t i o n

t o di s m i s s aft er i t al read y i s i n d efau l t, “ p u ts fo rm o v er s u b s t an ce[,] ” t h at

, i n fact

, i s

t h e l aw i n Geo rg i a.

Th e cas es ci t ed b y M arri o t t a n d t h e t ri al co u rt are i n ap po s i t e. In Ho es ch

Amer i ca

, In c. v. Da i Y

a n g M et a l Co

. , 2 1 7 G a. Ap p

. 84 5

, 8 45 -8 4 8 (1 ) (4 59 SE2 d 1 8 7 )

(1 9 9 5), th i s Co u rt fo u n d t h at a n o n r e s i den t s erv ed in an act i on bro u g h t u n d er

12Geo rg i a’ s Lo n g Arm St at u t e d id n o t wai v e h i s l ack o f p ers on al ju ri sd i ct i o n d efen s e

b y no t an s weri n g t h e co m pl ai n t

. Ho wev er, t h at cas e d i ffered fro m t h e o n e at i s s u e in

t wo k ey res p ect s : (1 ) t h e n o nres i d en t d efen d an t i n Ho es ch m o v ed t o o p en d efau l t an d

t h e t ri al co u rt g ran t ed t h at m o t i o n

, an d (2 ) t h e n o n res i d en t d efen dan t was a fo r e i g n

co rp o r a t i o n w h o was n o t t ran s act i n g b us i n es s i n Geo rg i a an d wh o was n ev er

i n fo rm ed i ts g o o d s wo u l d b e us ed o r del i v ered i n Geo rg i a. I d

. a t 8 4 5 (1 ). Th es e

d i fferen ces were al s o p res en t i n B & D Fa b r i ca t o r s v. D. H. Bl a ir In ves tmen t Ba n ki n g

Co r p

. , 2 2 0 Ga. Ap p

. 3 7 3 (1 ) (a) (4 6 9 SE2 d 6 8 3 ) (1 9 9 6 ), wh ere a fo rei g n co rp o rat i o n

n o t t ran s act in g b u s i n es s i n t h i s St at e m ov ed t o o p en defau l t

, an d t h e tri al c o u r t

g ran t ed t h e m o ti o n to o p en d efau l t an d t h en g ra n t e d t h e co rp o rat i o n ’ s m o t i o n to

d i s m i s s

. In b ot h cas es

, t h is Co u rt s p eci fi cal ly n o t ed t h at “ a fo rei g n co rp o rat io n wh i ch

i s n o t t ran s act i n g bu s in es s wi t h i n th i s s t at e can n o t be fo rced t o co m e i n t o t h e s t at e to

d efen d ag ai n s t a cl ai m o r t o co n t es t ju ri s di ct io n .” B & D F a b r ica t o r s

, 2 2 0 Ga. Ap p.

at 3 7 3 (1 ) (a); H

o es ch , 2 1 7 Ga. Ap p . at 8 4 7 (1 ).

Un l i ke t h e d efen d an t s i n Ho es ch an d B & D Fa br i ca t o r s

, M arri o t t n ev er m o v ed

t o op en d efau l t, wh i ch i t w as req u i red t o d o un d er St o u t

, 1 8 4 Ga. Ap p

. at 15 5 (3 ), an d

Ch en

, 22 8 Ga. Ap p

. at 3 46 -3 4 7

. In ad d i t i o n

, M arri o t t ad m i t t ed l y i s a f o rei g n

co rp o rat i o n au th o ri zed t o d o bu s i n es s in Geo rg i a, wi t h a reg i s t ered ag en t t o recei v e

13s erv i ce o f p ro ces s h ere i n Geo rg i a. Un d er Geo rg i a l aw, t h e o n l y m et h o ds fo r s u ch a

fo rei gn co rp o rat i on

, ev en i f co n s i d ered a no n res i d en t co rp orat i o n

, to as s ert a l ack o f

p ers o n al ju ri s d i ct io n o n ce t h e cas e i s i n d efau l t i n cl u de m o vi n g t o o p en d efau l t

, wh i ch

M arri o tt d i d no t do

, o r w ai t i n g u n t i l d efau lt j u d gm en t h as b een award ed an d t h en

m o vi n g t o s et as i d e t h e ju d g m en t u n d er OCGA § 9

- 11 -6 0 (d ). See Ch en

, 2 2 8 Ga.

Ap p

. at 3 4 6 -3 4 7 ; S t o u t

, 1 8 4 Ga. Ap p. at 15 5 (3 ). M arri o t t ’ s u n t i m el y m o t i o n to

d i s m i s s was n o t t he p ro p er v eh icl e t o as s ert th i s d efen s e an d rev i v e a cas e in d efau l t

.

See Ch en , 2 2 8 Ga. Ap p . at 3 4 6 -3 4 7 ; S t o u t , 1 8 4 Ga. Ap p . at 1 5 5 (3 ).

In t h i s cas e, th e t ri al co u rt fai l ed t o p ro p erl y ap p l y ex i s ti n g Geo rg i a l aw an d

reco g n ize t h at “ [b ] y b ei n g i n d efau l t, [M arri o t t ] wai ved [i t s] ri g h t to co n t es t t h e t ri al

co u rt ’ s ju ri s d i ct i o n o v er [i t s] p ers o n .” S t o u t

, 1 84 Ga. Ap p

. at 1 5 5 (3 ). W e, t herefo re,

rev ers e t h e d i s m i ss al o f W ard ’ s c o m p l ai n t an d rem an d t o t h e t ri al co urt to p ro ceed

wi t h W ard ’ s m o ti o n fo r d efau l t ju d gm en t

.

Ju d g men t r ever

s ed an d r ema n d

ed wi t h d ir ect i on

. Di l l a r d

, P. J., a n d Go b ei l

, J.,

co n cu r

.

14