THI RD DI VI SI ON

ELLI NGTON, P. J.

, BETHEL, J.

, and SENI OR A PPELLA T E JUDGE PHI PPS

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 30, 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 29 4 . BARBOUR v . SANGHA et al

.

P H I P P S , Sen i o r Ap p el l at e J u d g e.

Th i s i s an i n t erl o cu t o ry ap p eal fro m t h e d en i al o f p l ai n t i ff M i ch ael Barb o u r’ s

m o ti o n fo r en t ry o f d efau l t j u d gm en t ag ai n s t d efen d an t Dr. Su m an d eep San g h a aft er

Dr. San g h a’ s an swer w as reject ed b y t he Fay et t e Co u n ty St at e Co u rt e-fi l i n g s y s t em

.

Aft er a h eari n g

, t h e t ri al co urt d en i ed Barb o u r’ s m ot i o n an d al so fo u n d t h at t h e

m o ti o n l ack ed s u b st an t i al ju s ti fi cat i o n su ch t h at an award o f at t o rn ey fees u n d er

OCGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4 (b ) wa s w a r r an t ed

. On ap p eal

, Barb o u r arg u es t h at th e tri al co u rt

erred wh en i t o rd ered Dr. San g h a’ s an s wer to be accep t ed as t i m el y an d d en i ed

Barb o u r’ s m o t i o n fo r d efau l t ju d g m en t wi t h o u t an ev i den t i ary h eari n g

, th at t h e co u rt

s h o u ld h av e co n s i d ered wh et her o p en i n g d efau l t was ap p ro p ri at e, an d t h at t h e co u rt

al s o erred wh en i t fo u n d h i m l i ab l e fo r at t orn ey fees

. W e affi rm t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d en i alo f t h e m o t i o n fo r d efau l t ju d g m en t

, b u t we v acat e t h at co u rt ’ s fi n d i ng o f l iab i l i t y fo r

at t o rn ey fees an d rem an d fo r fu rt h er p ro ceed i ng s l im it ed t o t h at i ss u e.

W e rev i ew t h e den i al of a m o t i o n fo r en t ry o f d efau l t ju d g m en t o n l y fo r an

ab u se o f d i s cret i o n

. Ed

en f i el d & Co x, P. C. v. Ma ck

, 2 8 2 Ga. Ap p

. 8 1 6

, 8 1 6 (6 4 0

SE2 d 3 4 3) (2 0 0 6). “ [D] efau l t ju d g m en t i s a d ras t i c s an ct i o n t h at s h o u l d b e i n v o k ed

o n l y i n ex t rem e si t u at io n s

. W h en ev er p o s si bl e, cas es s h ou l d b e d e ci d ed o n t h ei r

m eri t s

, fo r d efau l t ju dg m en t i s n o t fav ored in l aw.” Th o m as v. Br o wn

, 3 0 8 Ga. Ap p.

5 1 4 , 5 1 7 (3 ) (7 0 7 SE2 d 9 00 ) (2 0 1 1 ) (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

Th e rel ev an t fact s are u n d i s p u t ed

. On May 3 1

, 2 0 1 6

, p l ai nt i ff M i ch ael Barb o u r

fi led t h e i n s t an t m ed i cal m al p ract i ce l aws u i t ag ai ns t d efen d an t Dr. Su m a n d e e p

San gh a in Fay et te Co u n t y St at e Co u rt

. Barb o u r s erv ed t h e co m p l ai n t on Dr. San g h a

o n J u ne 2

, 2 0 1 6

. On Ju l y 5

, 2 0 1 6

, Dr. San g ha’ s co u ns el el ect ro n i cal l y fi l ed an

an s wer, a d em an d fo r a ju ry t ri al

, a m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s an d b r i e f i n s u p p o rt

, an d a

req u es t fo r o ral arg um en t

, an d recei v ed an ack n o wl ed g m en t o f th e fi l i n g s fro m t h e

Peach C o u r t e-fi l i n g s y s t em th e s am e d ay

. 1 Defen s e co un s el al so s erv ed Barb o u r’ s

1 Th e el ect ro ni c m es s ag e s t at ed t h at th e fi l i ng “ was recei v ed b y Peach Co u r t

an d has b een su cces s fu l l y tran s m i t t ed t o t he Cl erk of Fay et te Co u n t y St at e Co u rt

. Yo u

w i l l recei v e a s ep arat e co n fi rm at i o n m es s ag e i f t h i s fi l i n g i s accep t ed by t h e c l e r k

. Pl eas e d o n o t rep l y t o t h i s m es sag e.”

2c o u n s el w i t h t h e fi l i n gs v i a U. S. M ai l an d m ai l ed co u rt es y co pi es t o t h e j u d g e ’s

ch am b ers

. On J u ly 6

, 2 01 6

, t h e cl erk ’ s offi c e s e n t an em ai l t o d efen s e co u n sel ’ s

reg i s tered e-fi l er, Vi ct o ri a L o ck ard

, t h at t h e fi l i ng s had b een reject ed b ecau s e “ t h e

s i gn at u res of t he d o cu m en t s d o n o t m at ch t h e cred en t i al s o f t h e fi ler.” Lo ck ard d id

n o t s ee t h i s em ai l

.

On J u l y 1 2

, 2 0 1 6

, t h e t r i al co u rt ’ s s t aff at to rn ey sen t an em ai l to b o t h s i d es

co n fi rm i n g recei p t o f Dr. San gh a’ s m o t i o n t o d i s m i ss

, bu t al s o s t at i n g t hat th e Cl erk ’ s

o ffi ce h ad n ot recei v ed t h e fi l i n g s an d as k i n g Dr. San g ha t o refi le th e m ot i o n

. Lat er

t h at d ay

, t h e s t aff at to rn ey al s o n o t ed v i a em ai l t h at th e Cl e rk h ad n o t recei v ed Dr.

San gh a’ s an s w er. D efen se co u n s el t h en learn ed t h at t h e Cl erk h ad reject ed t h e fi l i ng s

b ecau s e t h e s i gn at u res o n so m e o f t h e d o c u m e n ts (b y L o ri Co h en ) d i d n o t m at ch

Lo ck ard ’ s cred en t i al s

. Al th o u g h Dr. San gh a’ s an s wer was o n e o f t h e d o cu m en t s

reject ed

, no s uch m i s m at ch occu rred o n t h at do cu m en t

, wh i ch was s ig n ed b y Lo ck ard

h ers el f. Defen s e co u n s el refi l ed t h e an s w er, th e m o t io n t o d i s m i s s

, an d t h e rem ai n i n g

d o cu m en t s p rev io u s l y

fi l ed wi t h co rrect ed s i g n at ure l in es t h at s am e d ay

.

On J u l y 1 5, 2 0 1 6

, d efen se co un s el J es s i ca Od o m co n t act ed t h e Cl erk ’ s o ffi ce

t o co n fi rm accep t an ce o f t h e refi led p l ead i n g s an d t o in q u i re ab ou t t h e co s t s

3as s o ci at ed wi t h op en i n g an y p res u m ed d efau l t u n d er O C G A § 9

- 1 1 -5 5 (a). 2 An o ffi cer

wo rk er t o l d Od o m t h at t he d o ck et s h o wed an an s wer fi l ed o n J u l y 1 2 an d t hat i t was

t h erefo re n o t n eces sary fo r Dr. San g h a t o p ay an y co s t s

.

On Au g u st 8

, 2 0 1 6

, h o wev er, aft er t h e 1 5 -d ay peri o d t o o p en defau l t as a

m a t ter o f ri g ht h ad ex pi red

, Barb o u r fi l ed a m o t i o n fo r en t ry of d efau l t j u d g m en t

.

Aft er a h eari n g at wh i ch t h e t ri al co u rt n o t ed t h at t h e rel ev an t fact s were n o t in

d i s p u t e, t h e co u rt en t ered an o rd er fi n d i n g t h at Dr. San gh a’ s an s wer h ad b een “ t i m el y

fi led an d p ro p erl y s i g n ed b y t h e reg i st ered fi l er” a n d t h a t t h e an swer h ad b een

reject ed “ s o l el y du e t o t h e p u rp o rt ed p ro t o co l o f t h e Peach Co u rt e-fi l i n g sy s t em an d

t h e act i o ns o f th e Cl erk o f Co urt .” Ci t i n g Un ifo rm Su peri or Co u rt Ru l e 3 6 .1 6 (F),

wh i ch g ran t s a co u rt t he p o wer to “ en t er ap p ro p ri at e rel i ef” i n c a s e s i n wh i ch

“ el ect r o n i c f

i l i n g o r s erv i ce i s p rev en t ed o r d el ay ed b ecau s e o f a fai lu re o f t h e

el ect ro ni c fi l i n g s y s t em ,” t h e tri al co u rt i n s t ru ct ed it s Cl erk t o m ark Dr. San g h a’ s

an s wer as fi l ed an d d o ck et e d n u n c p r o t u n c as o f J ul y 5

, 2 0 1 6. Th e t ri al co u rt al s o

fo u n d t h at Barb o ur’ s “ h y p er-t ech ni cal ” m o ti o n fo r d efau l t ju d g m en t “ l ack ed

2 OCGA § 9-1 1-5 5 (a) p ro v i des i n rel ev an t p art : “ If i n an y cas e an an s wer h as

n o t b een fi l ed wi t h i n t h e ti m e req u i red by th i s ch ap t er, t h e c a s e s h al l au t o m at i cal l y

b eco m e i n d efau l t u nl es s t h e t i m e fo r fi l i ng t h e an swer h as b een ex t en d ed as p ro v i d ed

b y law. Th e defau l t m ay b e o p en ed as a m at t er o f ri gh t b y t h e fi l in g o f su ch d efen s es

wi t h i n 1 5 d ay s o f t h e d ay o f d efau l t , u p o n t he p ay m en t o f co s t s .”

4s u b s t an t i al ju s t i fi cat io n an d u n n eces s ari l y ex pan d ed t h e p ro ceed i n g s

, cau s in g u n d u e

ex p en s e” t o Dr. San g h a, s u ch t h at a n a wa r d o f reas o nab l e at to rn ey fees was

ap p ro p ri at e u n der OCGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4 (b ). T h e co u rt th u s d en i ed Barb ou r’ s m o t i o n fo r

d efau l t ju d g m en t

, d en i ed D r. San g h a’ s m ot i o n t o op en defau l t as m oo t

, an d res erv ed

i t s d et erm i n at i o n o f t h e am o u n t o f at t o rn ey fees fo r a l at er ev i d en t i ary h eari n g . Th e

t ri al co u rt al s o g ran t ed Barb o ur a cert i fi cat e o f i m m ed iat e rev i e w a s r e q u i red by

OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (b ). W e g ran t ed Barb o u r’ s ap p l i cat i o n fo r i n t erl o cu t ory rev i ew, an d

t h i s ap p eal fo l l o wed

.

1

. As a p r e l i m i n a ry m at t er, Barb ou r i s i n co rrect t o as s ert t h at th e t ri al co u rt

refu sed t o h o l d an ev id en t i ary h eari n g

. Th e t r a n s cri p t o f th e heari ng s h ows t h at t h e

fi rs t i ss u e ad d res s ed t h ere was wh et h er th ere was an y n eed fo r wi t n es s t es t i m o n y in

ad d i t i o n t o t he p art ies ’ p rev i o u s s u b m is s io n s

, i n cl u d i n g a t i m el i n e an d t h e ex h i b i t s

at t ach ed t o t h ei r p l ead i n g s an d m o t i o n s, d et ai l i n g t h e ev id en ce o u t l i n ed ab o v e. Aft er

h eari n g arg u m en t

, t he t ri al co u rt fo u n d t h at n o s u ch t es t i m o n y was n eces s ary i n l i g ht

o f t h e u n di s p u t ed fact s lai d o u t i n t h o s e fi l i n gs

. Th e reco rd al s o s h ows t h at aft er t h e

co u rt ’ s ru l i n g on th i s i s s u e, th e p art ies ag reed

, wi t h ou t o b ject i o n fro m Barb o u r, to

refer t o a b i nd er prep ared b y t h e d e fen se, an d p ro v i d ed t o p l ai nt i ffs an d t h e co u rt

,

5co n tai n i n g t h e rel ev an t fi li n gs an d t h ei r ex h i b i t s, al l o f wh i ch ap p ear i n t h e ap p el l at e

reco rd

.

2

. Barb o u r al s o arg ues t h at t he t ri al co u rt erred i n o rd eri n g Dr. San g h a’ s an s wer

d o ck et ed an d f

i l e d a s o f J u l y 5

, 2 0 1 6 an d t h us i n d en y i n g Barb o u r’ s m o t i o n fo r

d efau l t ju d g m en t. W e d i s ag ree.

A t ri al co u rt h as b ro ad d i s cret i o n to co rrect cl eri cal erro rs i n cl u d i n g a cl erk ’ s

fai l u re t o m ark a d o cu m en t as fi l ed o n t h e d at e th at do cu m en t i s act u al l y d el i v ered to

t h e cl er k

. F

o r s yt h v. Ha l e

, 16 6 Ga. Ap p. 3 4 0

, 34 3 (3 04 SE2 d 81 ) (1 9 83 ); s ee al s o

Gi b bs v. S p en cer In d

us t ri es

, 2 4 4 Ga. 4 5 0

, 45 0 -4 5 1 (2 6 0 SE2 d 34 2 ) (1 9 7 9 ) (t h e p ro p er

d at e o f a fi l in g i s an is s u e fo r t h e t ri al c o u r t t o r e s o l ve). Th is cas e co n cern s t h e

ap p li cat io n o f t hi s d i s cret i o n i n t h e c o n t e x t o f Un i fo rm Su p eri o r Co urt Ru l e 3 6 .1 6,

wh i ch p ro v i des i n rel ev an t p art :

(C ) S i g n at u res

. An el ect ro n ical l y fi l ed d o cu m en t i s d eem ed s i g n ed b y

t h e reg i s t ered fi ler s u b m i t t i n g t h e d o cu m en t as wel l as b y an y o t h er

p ers on wh o h as au t h o ri zed s i g n at u re b y th e fi l er. By el ect ro n i cal l y fi l i n g

t h e d o cu m en t , t h e fi l er v eri fi es t hat t h e s i g n at u res are au t h en t i c.

(D) Ti m e o f fi l i n g

. An el ect ro n i c d ocu m en t i s p r es u med f i l ed u p o n i t s

r ecei p t b y t h e el ect r o n i c f

i l in g s er vi ce p r ovi d

er

, w h i ch p ro v id er m

u s t

au t o m a t i c a l l y co n fi rm t h e fact

, d at e an d t im e o f recei p t t o t h e fi l er.

Ab s en t ev i d en ce of s u ch co n fi rm at i o n

, t h ere i s n o p res u m p t i o n o f fi l i n g

.

6. . .

(F) Sy s tem or u s er fi l i n g erro rs

. If el ect ro n i c fi l i n g o r s erv i ce i s

p rev en t ed o r d el ay ed b ecau s e o f a fai l ure o f t he el ect ro n i c fi li n g s y s t em

,

a co urt wi l l en t er ap pro pri at e rel i ef s u ch as t h e al lo wan ce o f fi l i n g s n u nc

p ro t u nc o r t h e p ro v i s i on s o f ex t en s i o n s t o res p o n d

.

(Em p h as i s s u p p li ed .)

Here, Dr. San g h a’ s an s wer was s i gn ed an d fi l ed b y t h e reg i s tered fi l er, wi t h t h e

res u l t t h at i t was “ p res u m ed fi led u p o n i t s recei pt ,” as co nfi rm ed b y t h e Peach Co u rt

e-fi l i ng s y s t em

. USCR 3 6 .1 6 (D). Th e t ri al co u rt t h u s h ad ev i d en ce fo r i t s co n cl u s i o n

t h at wh en t h e e-fi l i n g s y s tem reject ed t he en t ire b at ch o f d o cu m en t s

, i ncl u d i n g t h e

p ro p erl y ex ecu t ed a n d fi l ed an s wer, a “ s y s t em or u s er fi l in g erro r,” i n cl u d i n g a

“ fai l u re o f t h e el ect ro n i c fi l i n g s y s t em ,” o ccu rred s uch t h at t h e co u rt was au t h o ri zed

,

i f n o t req u i red

, t o “ en t er ap p ro p ri at e rel i ef s uch as t h e al l o wan ce o f [t h e fi l i n g ] n u n c

p ro t u nc.” Id

. at (F). It b ei n g u n d i s p ut e d t h a t Dr. San g ha’ s an swer was p ro p erl y

s i gn ed an d e-fi l ed o n J u l y 5

, 2 0 1 6

, an d th at t h e Peach Co u rt s y s tem reject ed t h e fi l i n g

b ecau s e o f m i s m at ch ed s i g n at u res on t h e o t h er d o cu m en t s al s o s ub m i t t ed o n t hat d at e,

t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t ab u s e i t s d i s cret i o n wh en i t o rd ered t h at an s w er d ock et ed as o f

t h at d at e. See La va n v. Ph i l l ip s

, 1 8 4 Ga. Ap p

. 5 7 3

, 5 7 4 (3 6 2 SE2 d 1 3 8 ) (1 9 8 7 )

7(rev ers in g a t ri al co u rt ’ s reject i o n o f a fi li n g wh en t he cl erk ’ s en d ors em en t “ d i d n ot

refl ect th e act u al fi l i n g d at e” s u ch t h at “ t h e t ri al co u rt s ho u ld h av e ru led [a] co m p l ai nt

t i m el y fi l ed ”).

3

. Becau s e t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t err i n ord eri n g San g h a’ s an s w er fi l ed as o f

J u l y 5

, 2 0 1 6

, t h e cas e n ev er wen t i n to defau l t

. See Ra i ni er Ho ld i n gs v. Ta t u m

, 2 7 5

Ga. A p p

. 8 7 8

, 87 9 (1 ) (6 2 2 SE2 d 8 6 ) (2 0 0 5 ) (wh en d efect i n a co rp o rat e d efen d an t ’ s

an s wer was cu red b y t h e fi l i n g o f a s eco n d an s wer b y a l i cen s ed at to rn ey

, th e s eco n d

an s w e r r e l a t ed b ack s u ch t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred i n en t eri n g a d efau lt ju d g m en t

ag ai n s t t h at d efen d an t ). Becau se t h e cas e n ev er wen t i n to d efau l t

, t h e t ri al co u rt was

n o t r e q u i red t o reach t h e q ues t i o n wh et h er d efau lt s h o u l d h av e been o p en ed u n d e r

OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 5 (a).

4

. B a r b o u r al s o as s ert s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred wh en i t co n cl ud ed t h at h i s

m o ti o n fo r d efau l t ju d g m en t l ack ed s u b s t an t i al ju s t i fi cat i o n a n d u n n eces s ari l y

ex p an d ed t h e p ro ceed i ng s s u ch t h at San g h a was en t i t led t o reas o n ab l e at t orn ey fees

u n d er OCGA § 9-1 5-1 4 (b ). 3

3 T h e s t at u te p r o v i d e s in rel ev an t p art : “ (b ) Th e co u rt m ay as s es s reas o n ab l e

an d n eces s ary at t o rn ey ’ s fees an d e x p e n s e s of l i t i g at i o n in an y ci v i l act i o n i n an y

co u rt o f reco rd i f, u po n t h e m o t i o n o f an y p a r t y o r t h e co urt i t s el f, i t fi n d s t h at an

at t o rn ey o r p art y b ro u g ht o r defen d ed an act io n

, o r an y p art th ereo f, t h at l ack ed

s u b s t an t i al ju s t i fi cat i o n o r th at t h e act i o n

, o r a n y p art t h ereo f, was i n t erp o s ed fo r

8Al t h ou g h Barb o u r co m p l ai n s t h at San g h a sh o u l d h av e fi led a s ep arat e m o t i o n

fo r fees u n der OCGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4 , a t ri al co u rt i s en t i t l ed t o co n s i d er t h e i s su e “ u p o n

i t s o wn m o t i o n .” M

i z e v. Reg i o n s Ba n k

, 2 6 5 Ga. Ap p . 6 3 5 , 6 36 (2 ) (5 95 SE2 d 3 2 4 )

(2 0 0 4), ci t i n g O CGA § 9-1 5-1 4 (b ). Here, bas ed o n t h e ev id en ce s u b m i t t ed b y t h e

p art i es

, b u t aft er arg um en t l i m i t ed t o t h e m o t i o n s f o r d efau lt ju d g m en t an d t o o p en

d efau l t

, t h e t ri al co u rt reach ed t h e co n cl u si o n t h at Barb o u r’ s m o t io n fo r d efau l t

ju d g m en t “ l ack ed s ub s t an t i al ju s t i fi cat i o n .”

Th e reco rd s h o ws

, how e ve r

, t h at t h e i s s ue o f at to rn ey fees was n ev er m en t i o n ed

o r arg u ed at t h e h eari n g

. Th e t ri al co u rt t h u s erred wh en i t co n s i d ered t h e i s s u e o f

l i ab i l i t y u n d er OCGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4 (b ) “ wi t ho u t p ro v i d i n g n o t i ce t h at i t was co n s i d eri n g

an award u n d er th at Co d e s ect io n o r a h eari n g o n t ha t i ss u e .” W a l l v. Th u r ma n

, 2 8 3

Ga. 5 33

, 53 4 (3 ) (6 6 1 SE2 d 54 9 ) (2 0 0 8) (em p h as i s s u p p li ed ); s ee al s o Ever s v. Ever s

,

2 7 7 Ga. 1 3 2

, 1 3 2 (1 ) (5 8 7 SE2 d 2 2 ) (2 0 03 ) (a part y o p p o s i n g a m o ti o n fo r at t o rn ey

fees u n der OCGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4 (b ) m u s t b e a f f o r d ed an “ oral h eari ng ,” i n cl ud i n g “ an

o p p o rt u ni t y t o co nfro n t an d ch al l en g e t es t i m o ny as t o t h e n eed fo r, an d v al u e o f, l eg al

s erv i ces ”). W e t h erefo re v acat e t h e p o rt i o n o f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s award fi n d i n g Barb o u r

d el ay o r h aras s m en t

, o r i f it fi n d s t h at an at t o rn ey o r part y un n eces sari l y ex p an d ed t h e

p ro ceed in g b y

o t h er i m pro p er co n d uct . . . .”

9l i ab l e fo r fees u n d er OCGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4 ( b ) a n d rem an d fo r fu rt h er p ro ceed i ng s

co n si s t en t w i t h t h i s o p i n i o n

, i n cl ud i n g an ev i den t i ary h ea r i n g a s t o b o t h Barb o u r’ s

l i ab i l i t y un d er t h at s t at u t e an d t h e reas o n ab l en es s o f t h e fees s p en t o n d efen d i n g

ag ai n s t t h e m o t i o n fo r d efau l t ju d g m en t

. W a l l

, 28 3 Ga. a t 5 3 4 ( 3 ) (rev ers i ng award

o f at t o rn ey fees wh en t ri al co u rt fai l ed to co n d u ct a h eari n g as to p art y ’ s l iab i l i t y fo r

OCGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4 (b ) at t o rn ey fees

, ev en wh en i t l at er “ p r o v i d ed a h eari n g to

d et erm i n e t h e am o u n t o f at t o rn ey fees t h at were d u e”).

Ju d g men t a f f i r med in p a r t a n d va ca t ed i n p a r t

, a n d ca s e rema n ded wi th

d i r ect i o n. El l i n g t o n , P. J., a n d Bet h el , J., co n cu r

.

10