SECOND DI VI SI ON

RI CKM A N, C. J.

, M I LLER, P. J.

, PI PKI N, 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.

https ://w w w

. ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s

June 15, 2022



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 2 A0 06 3

. BIRCH PROPERTY PARTNERS, L L C et al

. v

. SIM PSON.

A2 2 A0 0 6 4 . SIM PSON et al . v . HUSFELD.

M I LLE R , Pres i d i n g J u d g e.

Th es e t wo ap p eal s s t em fro m th e fau l t y co n s tru ct io n o f a h o m e. Aft er a b en ch

t ri al

, t h e t ri al co urt en t ered ju d g m en t i n fav o r of t h e h o m eo wn er pl ai n t i ffs

, Bri an an d

Sh an n o n Si m

p s on

, o n t h ei r cl ai m s fo r breach o f co n tract a n d b r each o f warran t y

ag ai n s t t h e b u i l d er, Bi rch Pro p ert y Part n ers

, LLC (“ Bi rch Pro p ert i es ”). Th e Si m p s on s

al s o fi l ed a n eg l i g en t co n s t ru ct i o n cl ai m ag ai n s t G r eg Hu s fel d

, t h e o wn er an d

o p erat o r o f Bi rch Pro pert i es

, b u t t h e t ri al co u rt fo u n d i n Hu s fel d’ s fav o r o n t hi s cl ai m

.

In Cas e No

. A2 2 A0 0 6 3

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es ap p eal s fro m th e t ri al c o u r t ’s ju d g m en t

,

arg u i n g t h at (1 ) t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y fai l i n g t o m ak e fi n d i n g s o f sp eci fi c d am ag es ;( 2 ) t h e t ri al co u rt erred by award i n g ex ces s i v e d am ag es ; (3 ) th e tri al co u rt err e d b y

fai l i n g t o m ak e fi n d i n gs o n it s co u n t e rcl ai m s ; (4 ) t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y al l o wi n g

c ert ai n ex p ert t es t i m o n y ; (5 ) t h e Si m p s o n s wai v ed t h ei r cl ai m fo r d am ag es t o t h e

d ri v eway b y m ak i n g m o d i fi cat i o n s ; an d (6 ) t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y award i ng at t o rn ey

fees t o t h e Si m

p s o n s

. In Cas e No

. A2 2A0 0 6 4, t h e Si m p s o n s c r o s s

- a pp eal fro m t h e

t ri al co u rt ’ s ju dg m en t

, co n t en d i n g t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b ecau s e i t d id n o t en t er a

ju d g m en t ag ai n s t Greg Hu sfel d i n h i s i n d i v i d u al cap aci t y

.

In Cas e No

. A2 2 A0 0 63

, we aff i r m t he t ri al co u rt ’ s d am ag es award t o t h e

Si m p s on s

, b u t we rev ers e th e l u m p s u m award o f at t o rn ey fees an d rem an d t h i s cas e

fo r an ev i d en t iary h eari ng t o al l o w th e Si m p s o n s t o seg reg at e t h e n u m b er o f h o u rs

t h at were al l o cat ed t o t h ei r s u cces s fu l cl ai m s. In Cas e No

. A2 2 A0 0 6 4, we affi rm t h e

t ri al co u rt ’ s ju d g m en t i n Hu s fel d ’ s fav o r.

“ W h ere t h e t ri al c o u r t i s t h e fi n der o f fact

, i t d et erm in es w ei g h t, cred i b i l i t y

,

o p i n i o n ev i d en ce, s uffi ci en cy

, an d ad m i s si b i l i t y o f al l ev id en ce; if t h e r e i s an y

ev i d en ce t o s up p o rt t h e ju d g m en t

, i t m u s t b e affi rm ed .” R i c e v

. Lo s t M o u n t a in

Ho meo wn er

s As s n

. , In c.

, 2 6 9 Ga. Ap p

. 3 51

, 35 7 (7 ) (6 0 4 SE2 d 21 5 ) (2 0 0 4 ). An d

“ [w] h ere, as h ere, t he p art i es do n o t req ues t

, an d t he t ri al co u rt d o es n o t m ak e, wri t t en

fi nd i ng s o f fact

, an y en u m er at i o n o f erro r t h at wo u l d req u ire co n s id erat i o n o f a

2fi nd i ng of fact can n o t b e rev iewed o n ap p eal

. W e rev i ew q u es t i o n s of l aw d e n o v o.”

Ga t ewa y Co mmu n i t

y S vc. Bd . v. Bo n a t i , 3 46 Ga. Ap p . 6 5 3 (8 1 6 SE2 d 7 4 3 ) (2 0 1 8 ).

In Ap ri l 2 0 1 6, t h e Si m

p s o n s an d Bi rch Pro p ert i es ex ecu t ed an ag reem en t fo r

t h e co n s t ru ct i o n o f a h o m e o n a p ro p ert y in Ho s ch t o n

, Geo rg i a. Th e i n i t i al co s t o f t h e

c o n s t ru ct i o n was $ 29 7 ,9 0 0

, an d t h e p art ies l at er am en d ed t h e co n tract t o refl ect a

rev i s ed to t al o f $ 3 2 6,3 2 4.5 6

. Th e Si m p s o n s m o v ed i n t o t h e h o m e aro u n d Decem b er

1 2

, 2 0 16

. Ap p ro x i m at el y t h ree week s l at er, on Jan u ary 6

, 2 0 1 7

, Sh an n o n Si m p so n

s en t a “ p u n ch l i s t” t o Bi rch Pro p ert i es

, i t e m i zi n g v ari o u s co n s t ru ct i o n i s s u es t h at

n eed ed t o b e ad d res s ed

. H u sfel d res p o n d ed

, “ Go t i t

. I w i l l g et t h es e i t em s s ch ed u l ed

an d l et y o u k n o w wh en .”

In Ap ri l 20 1 7

, aft er n o rep ai r s h a d b een co m p l et ed

, t h e Si m

p s o n s h i red a

s t ru ct u ral en g i n eer, Mau reen Dav i s

, t o co n d u ct a l i m i t ed i n sp ect i o n o f t h e h o m e.

Dav is in s p ect s co m

m erci al an d res i d en t i al b u il d i n g s f or c onstr uc tion de f e c t s an d co d e

co m p l ian ce. In a d et ai l ed rep o rt

, s h e i d en t ifi ed

, it em i zed

, an d i ncl u d ed p h o t o g rap h s

o f n um ero u s areas o f co n cern wi t h t h e h om e. U l ti m at el y

, Dav i s ’ p ro fes s i on al o p i n i o n

was t h at t h e h o m e h ad b een i m p ro p erl y co n s tru ct ed

, t h at “ d i s t res s [was ] m an i fes t i n g

i t sel f t hro u g h o u t t h e h o m e,” an d t h at s ev eral d efect s n eed ed to b e rep ai red

. In a l et t er

d at ed M ay 15

, 2 0 1 7, Bri an Si m p s o n req ues t ed a “ p lan o f act i o n ” f r o m B i rch

3Pro p ert i es

, an d he al s o s en t a co p y o f D av i s ’ rep o rt

. T h ereaft er, t h e Si m p s o n s an d

Bi rch Pro p ert i es co nt i n u ed di s cu s s i o n s reg ard i ng rep ai rs at t h e pro p ert y

, b u t i n J u l y

2 0 1 7

, th e Si m

p s o n s req u es t ed t h at Bi rch Pro pert i es ceas e at t em p t s t o co n t i n u e wo rk

o n t h e p ro p ert y

.

Th e Si m p s o n s f i l ed s u i t ag ai n s t Bi rch Pro p ert i es fo r b reach o f co n t ract an d

b reach of warran t y

, an d th ey al so fi l ed a n eg l i g en t co ns t ru ct i o n cl ai m ag ai n s t Hu s fel d

i n h i s in d i v i d u al cap aci t y

. Th e Si m p so n s fu rt her req u es t ed at to rn ey fees u n d er OCGA

§ 1 3 -6 -1 1 o n th e b as i s t h at t h e d efen d an t s h ad act ed i n bad fai t h, h ad b een s t u b b o rn l y

l i ti g i o u s

, an d h ad cau s ed t h em u n n eces s a r y t ro ub l e an d ex p en s e. Hu s fel d

co u nt ercl ai m ed fo r at t o rn ey fees an d l i t i g at i o n e x p en s es o n t h e b as i s t h at t h e cl ai m

ag ai n s t h i m was fri v o l o u s an d l a c k e d s u bs t an ti al ju s t i fi cat io n

. Bi rch Pro p ert i es

co u nt ercl ai m ed fo r wro n g fu l at t e m p t ed t erm in at i o n o f co n t ract

, b reach of co n t ract

,

an d at t o rn ey

fees

.

At t h e en s ui n g b en ch t ri al

, Dav is was ad m i tt ed as an ex p ert w i t nes s an d

p ro v id ed ex t en s i v e t es t i m o n y o n t h e s p eci fi c m ajo r rep ai rs req ui red

. Th ere were l arg e

g ap s i n t he wo o d fl o o ri n g , an d wh en s h e rei n s p ect ed th e h o m e in 2 0 2 0

, p o rt i o n s o f

t h e fl o o ri n g h ad d el am i n at ed fro m t h e co n cret e su rface an d p art s o f t h e fl o o r were

“ p o p p i n g .” Dav i s t es t i fi ed t h at t h e fl o o ri n g h ad no t b een p ro perl y i n s t al l ed an d t h at

4t h e co n cret e s u rface was n o t ad eq u at el y “ p rep p ed ” b efo re t he wo o d was l ai d d o wn

.

In h er vi ew, t h e fl oo ri n g n eed ed t o b e rem o v ed an d rei n s tal l ed

. Ad di t i o n al ly

, Dav i s

o b s erv ed t hat th e d ri v eway was i m p r o p erl y sl o p ed

, wh i ch was cau si n g d rai n ag e

i s su es an d d am ag e t o t h e co n cret e. In h er o p i n i o n

, t h e d ri v eway d i d n ot m eet i n d u s t ry

s t an d ard s

, an d p o rt i o n s of t h e d r i v e w a y n eed ed t o b e rep l aced

. Nex t, al t h o u g h t h e

p l an s fo r t h e h om e i n cl u d ed a fo u n d at i o n d rai n ag e s y s t em

, i t h ad n o t b een i n s t al l ed

.

Th e d rai n ag e fro m

t h e ro o f p res en t ed a co d e v i ol at i o n i n t h at t h e “ ro o f ru n o ff” was

n o t s u ffi ci en t l y ex t en d ed wh i ch l ed t o th e o v er-s at u rat i o n o f t h e s oi l ad jacen t t o t h e

fo u n dat i o n o f t h e h o m e.

Dav i s fu rt h er o b s erv ed d ecay i n t h e ex t eri o r t ri m an d t hat wat er was n o t b ei n g

ad eq uat el y d rai n ed fro m th e s i d i n g o f t h e h om e, an d s h e d et erm i ned th at t h e s i d i n g

h ad t o b e rem ov ed

. Sh e al s o t es t i fi ed th at w h i l e t he p l an s fo r t h e g arag e cal l ed fo r

s t eel I-b eam s

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es h ad d o wn g rad ed t o l am i n at ed v en eer l u m b er b eam s

.

Becau s e o f t h e “ en d b eari n g ” o f t h es e b eam s, t h ere was d i s tres s i n t h e rear wal l

, an d

u p o n her rei n s pect i o n o f t h e h o m e i n 2 0 2 0, Dav i s s aw t h at t h e crack s i n t h e wal l were

ex p an d i ng an d i m

p act i n g t h e op er a t i o n of t h e wi n d ows i n t h e garag e. In o rd er to

rem ed y t h es e i ss u es

, t h e w al l cav i t i es h ad t o b e o p en ed

, t h e s h eet ro ck n eed ed t o b e

rep l aced

, t h e wi n do w fram es r e q u i r e d read j u s ti n g

, an d t h e wi n do ws n eed ed t o b e

5res et

. A d di t i on al l y

, t h e q u al it y o f t h e s t o n ewo rk o n t h e ex t eri or o f t h e h o m e was p o o r,

t h ere were cl u m

p s o f m o rt ar i n t h e st o newo rk

, an d “ m an y o f t he p en et rat i o n s t h ro u g h

t h e s t o n e v en eer” h ad n o t b een s eal ed

. Dav i s t hen t es t i fi ed ab o u t t he at t i c, ex p l ai n i n g

t h at t h e ho m e d i d n ot s at i s fy “ t h e co n d i t i o n s o f t h e b u i l d i ng co de” b ecau se t here was

n o u n o b s tru ct ed p at h t o t h e fu rn ace eq u i p m en t

. Th erefo re, t he d u ct w o rk n eed ed t o b e

rel o cat ed o r t h e fu rn ace i t sel f h ad t o b e m o v ed

. Ul t i m at el y

, Dav is o p in ed t h at Bi rch

Pro p ert i es was r e q u i r e d t o co m p l y wi t h t h e p lan s an d s peci fi cat i o n s fo r t h e h o m e,

ab i d e b y i n d u s try s t an d ard s an d b u i l d i n g co d es

, an d p erfo rm t h e wo rk i n a “ g o o d an d

wo rk m an l i k e m an n er.” In h er o p i ni o n

, h o w ev er, Bi rt h Pro p ert i es fai led to m ee t t h e

s t an d ard o f care wi th reg ard t o t h e d efect s t o wh ich s h e h ad t es ti fi ed

.

Dav i s al s o t es t i fi ed t o a h o s t o f m i s cel l an eo u s co n cern s wi t h t h e in t eri o r an d

ex t eri o r of t h e h o m e, i n cl u d i n g t h e i m p ro p er p l acem en t o f t he la u n d r y r oo m s i n k;

m i s al i g ned k i t ch en cab i net s ; an i m p ro p erl y i ns t al l ed p ock et d o o r; dry wal l d i s t res s in

t h e b at h ro o m ; a d am ag ed p at i o d oo r; a n d a c o n d e n s at e l i n e t h at al l o wed wat er to

d rai n d i r e ct l y o nt o t h e fo u nd at i o n

, wh i ch can weak en th e fo un d at i o n of t h e h o m e.

Dav is o p i n ed

, h o wev e r

, t h at s h e d i d n o t vi ew t h es e m i s cel lan eo u s i t em s t o b e

co n st ru c t i o n defect s ; rat h er, so m e o f t h e i tem s w ere i m p o rt an t t o t h e Si m

p s o n s an d

o t h ers refl ect ed qu al i t y i s s u es

. Bas ed o n Dav i s ’ rep o rt

, T om Ho rd o s o f Creat i v e Ed g e

6Co n s t ru ct i o n p rep ared an es t i m at e fo r al l o f t h e rep ai rs

, wh i ch am ou n ted t o $ 2 1 6 ,7 9 8.

Ho rd o s

, wh o w a s a l s o ad m i t t ed as an ex p ert w i t nes s at t ri al

, ag reed th at Bi rch

Pro p ert i es fai l ed to b u il d th e h o m e u s i n g t h e qu al i t y an d s t a n dard o f care t y p i cal l y

u s ed i n t he area fo r fi n i s h i n g ho m es

. Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’ ex p ert p ro p o sed al t ern at i v e

rep ai rs t o t h o se li s t ed i n Dav is ’ rep o rt an d t es t i fi ed t h at s om e of t h e rep ai rs were n ot

n eed ed . In Hu s fel d ’ s es t i m at i o n, t h e rep ai rs i n Dav is ’ rep o rt am o u n t ed t o $ 1 5 ,0 0 0

.

T h e t r i al co u rt en t ered a “ fi n al ord er an d ju d g m en t ” s ol el y ad d res s i n g t h e

Si m p s on s ’ cl ai m s an d award i ng t h em $ 1 5 6 ,6 2 0 o n t hei r breach o f co nt ract an d b reach

o f warran t y cl ai m s an d $ 2 1 ,6 79 .2 8 in at t o rn ey fees

. As t o t h e n eg l i g en t co ns t ru ct i o n

cl ai m ag ai n s t Hu s fel d i n h is p ers o n al cap aci t y

, th e tri al c o u r t f o u n d i n Hu s fel d ’ s

fav o r. Th e t ri al co urt d et erm i ned t h at “ th ere [was ] n o j u s t reas o n t o d el ay an en t ry o f

ju d g m en t ag ai ns t [Bi rch Pro p ert i es ] ” an d d i r e c t e d t h e en t ry o f ju d g m en t fo r t h e

Si m p s on s . Bi rch Pro p ert i es fi l ed a t i m el y n o t i ce o f ap p eal

, an d t h e Si m p so n s cro s s

ap p eal ed

.

Ca s e No . A2 2 A0 0 6 3

1

. Fi rs t

, Bi rch Pro p ert ies arg u es th at t h e t ri al c o u rt erred b ecau s e i t fai l ed to

m ak e s p eci fi c fi n d i n g s reg ard i n g t h e am o u n t o f rep ai r co s t s award e d f o r e a ch

co n st ru ct i o n d efect

. Bi rch P r op ert i es s u g g es t s t h at t h i s om i s s i o n m ean s t h at t h e

7ju d g m en t was b as ed o n s p ecu l at i o n

, co n ject u re, an d g u es s wo rk

. W e co n cl u d e t h at t h e

ab s en ce o f s p eci fi c fi n d i n gs i n t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s ju d g m en t d o es n o t warran t rev ers al

.

“ [D] am ag es m

u s t b e reas o n ab l e an d p ro ven in a m an n er s u ffi ci en t t o al l o w t h e

fact fi n d er t o es t i m at e t h em wi th reas o n ab le c ert ai n t y free fro m s pecu l at i o n,

co n j ect ure an d g u es s w o rk .” (Ci t at io n an d p u nct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Jo h n Th u r mo n d &

As s o c., In c. v. Ken n ed

y

, 2 8 4 Ga. 4 6 9 , 4 7 3 (2 ) (6 6 8 SE2 d 6 6 6 ) (2 0 0 8 ).

Th e fact t h at t h e t ri al co u rt en t ered an ag g reg at e am o u n t of d a m a g e s i n t h i s

cas e was n o t e r r o r b ecau s e t h e ev i d en ce en ab l ed t he t ri al co u rt t o d et erm i n e t h e

am ou n t o f d am ag es wi t h reas on ab le cert ai n ty

. Bas ed o n al l t h e i t em s d et ai l ed in

Dav is ’ i ns p ect i o n rep o rt

, Ho rd o s s u b m i t t ed an i t em i zed es t i m at e fo r t h e rep ai rs t h at

l i st ed t h e co s t t o fi x each i s s u e. Ho r d o s t es ti fi ed ex t en si vel y reg ard i n g t h e

req u i rem en t s o f each rep ai r, an d t h e es t i m at e was en t ered i n to ev i den ce. To b e s u re,

Dav is o p i n ed t h at n o n e o f t h e m i s cel l an eo u s i n t eri o r an d ex teri o r i t em s i n cl u d ed i n

h er rep o rt co n s t i t u t ed co n s t r u ct i o n d efect s

. Sh e al s o ap peared s k ep t i cal o f Ho rd o s ’

q u o t e fo r “ ro o f wo rk

, ” wh i ch am ou n t ed t o $ 1 1

, 0 40 , b ecau se s h e nev er o b serv ed an

o n g o i n g l eak i n t h e ro o f. Nev ert h el es s

, ev en s u b t ract i n g t he en t i re p ro p o s ed am o u n t s

fo r t he m i s cel l an eo u s i t em s an d t h e “ ro o f wo rk ,” t h e es t i m at e fo r t h e rem ai n i n g m ajo r

p ro ject s wo u l d h av e am ou n t ed t o $ 1 6 7 ,9 2 8

. Th erefo re, t he t ri al co u rt ’ s ag g reg at e

8ju d g m en t am o un t o f $ 15 6 ,6 2 0 was wi t h i n t h e ran g e o f ev i den ce t h at was p res en t ed

o n d am ag es fo r t he m ajo r p ro ject s t hat Dav i s t es t i fi ed need ed t o b e co m pl et ed

, a n d

g i v en t h e cl ear an d s p eci fi c ev i den ce o f t h e co s t o f each rep ai r, w e can n o t s ay t h at t h e

ju d g m en t am o u n t res u l t e d f ro m “ s p ecu l at i o n an d g u es s wo rk .” 1 See Do s s i e v.

S h er wo o d

, 3 0 8 Ga. Ap p

. 1 8 5

, 18 7 -1 8 9 (7 0 7 SE2 d 1 3 1) (2 0 1 1 ) (al t h o u gh t he ju ry d id

n o t s eg reg at e i t s d a m a g e s award

, t h e award was n ot b as ed o n “ s pecu l at i o n an d

g u es swo rk ” becau se i t fel l wi t h i n t h e ran ge of ev i d en ce p res en t ed ); Gi p s o n v.

Ph i l l i p s

, 2 3 2 Ga. Ap p

. 2 3 5

, 2 3 6 (5 0 1 SE2 d 5 7 0 ) (1 9 98 ) (l u m p s u m v erd i ct was

“ wi t h i n t h e ran g e o f th e ev i d en ce at t ri al wh i ch s h o wed p ro p ert y d am ag e t o t h e v an

,

m e d i c a l b i ll s

, pai n an d su fferi ng

, an d [t h e p l ai nt i ff’ s ] i n ab il i ty t o wo rk aro u n d t h e

h o u s e an d y ard an d care fo r t h e an i m al s ”).

1 O f t h e m ajo r rep ai rs

, Dav i s an d H o rd o s h ad a d ifferen ce of o p in i o n o n t h e

es t i m at es fo r t h e d ri v eway an d t h e ro o f d rai nag e i s s u es

. Nev ert h el es s

, t he tri al co u rt

was cert ai n l y en t i t l ed t o cred i t Ho rd o s ’ t es t i m o n y as t o t h e rep ai rs n eed ed fo r t h e

d ri v eway

, Ra

f fer z ed er v. Zel l n er

, 2 7 2 Ga. Ap p

. 72 8

, 7 3 0 (1 ) (6 1 3 SE2 d 22 9 ) (2 0 0 5 ),

an d Bi r c h P r o p e r t i es has n o t i d en t i fi ed ev i d en ce t hat Ho rd o s ’ s ol u t i o n fo r t h e ro o f

d rai n ag e i s s u es was u n reas o n ab l y ex p en s i v e. Al s o

, wh i l e Dav i s reco m m en d ed

“ fl as h i n g ” cert ai n areas i n t h e s t o n e v en eer o u t s i d e th e ho m e, s h e co n ced ed t h at i f

rem o v al of t h e s t o n es w as deem ed n eces s ary

, t h en Ho rd os w o u l d h a v e at t ri b u t ed a

co s t fo r t h i s rem ov al , wh i ch h e d i d

.

9In s o far as Bi rch Pro p ert ies d es i red fo r t h e t ri al co urt t o en t er fi n d i n g s o f fact

an d co n cl u s i o n s o f l aw, Bi rch Pro p ert i es fai l ed to m ak e t h i s req ues t ei t h er b efo re o r

aft er t h e en t ry o f t h e ju dg m en t

, as au t ho ri zed b y OCGA § 9-1 1 -5 2 (a), (c). A l t h o u g h

Bi rch Pro p ert i es cl ai m s t hat i t was u n ab l e t o i n s is t o n fi n d i n g s of fact an d co n cl u s i on s

o f l aw b ecau s e t h e t ri al co u rt en t ered t h e ju d g m en t th ree week s aft er t h e t ri al

, n o t h i n g

p rev en ted Bi rch Pro p e r t i e s fro m req u es ti n g s p eci fi c d am ag es b efo re o r d u ri n g t h e

t ri al un d er OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 2 (a) o r fi l i n g a p os t -ju d g m en t req u es t u n d er OCGA § 9

-

1 1 -5 2 (c) fo l l o wi n g th e en try o f t h e tri al co u rt ’ s wri tt en ju d g m en t. See Pa ys o n v.

Pa ys o n

, 2 7 4 G a. 2 3 1

, 2 3 4 (2 ) (5 5 2 SE2 d 8 3 9 ) (2 0 0 1 ) (co n s t ru in g OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 2

(c) an d co n cl u d i ng t h at t h e t i m e t o fi l e s u ch a req u es t ru n s fro m t h e en t ry o f t h e t ri al

co u rt ’ s wri tt en ju d g m en t aft er a b en ch t ri al ). Acco rd in g l y

, t h is en u m erat i o n o f erro r

l ack s m eri t. 2

2. Nex t

, Bi rc h P r o p ert i es arg u es t h at t h e d am ag es award was ex ces s i v e an d

u n reas o nab l e, an d t h e aw a r d s h o u l d hav e i n s t ead b een l i m i t ed t o t h e d i fferen ce

2 B i r c h Pro pert i es cl ai m s t h at

, g i v en t h e fo rm o f th e t ri al co u rt ’ s ju d g m e n t

,

t h ere i s n o t el l i n g wh et her t h e t ri al co u rt co n s i dered i t s co un t ercl ai m s

. Th i s arg u m en t

i s ad d res s ed b el o w

, as p art o f o u r d et erm i n at i o n t hat Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’ co un t ercl ai m s

rem ai n p en d i ng

.

10b et ween t h e fai r m ark et v al u e o f t h e h o u s e as co n t ract ed an d t h e fai r m ark et v al u e o f

t h e h o us e as co ns t ru ct ed . Th es e arg u m en t s are n o t m eri t o ri o u s

.

A fact fi n d er i s “ g i v en w i d e l at it u d e i n d et erm i ni n g t h e am o u n t o f d am ag es to

b e award ed b as ed o n t h e u n i q u e fact s o f each cas e.” Jo h n Th u r m o n d & As s o c., In c.

,

s u p ra, 2 84 Ga. at 4 6 9 (1 ). “ As a g en eral ru l e, d am ag es fo r d efect i v e co n s t ru ct i o n

. .

. are d et erm i n ed b y m eas u ri n g t h e co s t o f rep ai ri n g or res t o ri n g t h e d am ag e

, u n l es s

t h e co st o f re p a i r i s d i s p ro po rt i o n at e t o t h e p ro p ert y ’ s p ro bab l e l os s o f v al u e.”

(Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed

. ) Id

. at 4 7 0 (1 ). “ [P] ro o f o f t h e co s t o f rep ai r b ecau s e o f t h e

d efect i ve co n s t ru ct i o n

. . . i s m o re l i kel y t o rep res en t t h e t ru e d am ag e s u ffered fro m

t h e fai l u re o f a co n t ract o r t o c o m p l e t e h i s co nt ract t h an wo u l d t h e o p i n i on o f an

ex p ert as t o t h e d i f

f e ren ce i n v al u es .” (Ci t at io n om i t t ed .) Id

. In an y ev en t

, co s t o f

rep ai r an d d i m in u t i o n i n v al u e are a l t er n a t i ve m eas u res o f d am ag es , an d an i n ju red

p a r t y m ay ch o os e t o p res en t t h ei r cas e u s i ng ei t h er m et h o d

. Id

. at 4 7 1 (1 ). W h et h er

t h e fact s ju s t ify t h e ap p l i cat i o n o f t h e ru l e p erm i t t i n g reco v ery fo r t h e reas o n ab l e co s t

o f rep ai rs “ i s a q u es t io n o rd i n ari l y d et erm i n ed by th e t ri al co u rt bas ed o n t h e v ary i n g

fact s an d ci rcu m s t an ces o f each cas e.” Id . n

. 3

.

11(a) W e fi rs t ad d res s Bi rch Pro p ert ies ’ arg u m en t t h at t h e award to t h e Si m p s on s

was 6 6 % o f t h e co n tract p ri ce an d t h at t h e Si m p s o ns w ere t h erefo re u nju st l y en ri ch ed

b y t h e award , an d t hat Bi rch Pro p ert i es was u n ab le t o m ak e a reas o n ab l e p ro fi t

.

“ [T] h i s Co urt wi l l no t d is t u rb a d am ag es awar d u n l e s s i t i s s o fl ag ran t as to

s h o ck t h e co n s ci en ce.” Ca vi n v. Po wel l

, 2 7 6 Ga. Ap p

. 6 0

, 6 1 (1 ) (6 2 2 SE2 d 4 1 5 )

(2 0 0 5). Ou r Su p rem e Co u rt h as al s o cau t i o n ed ag ai n s t t h e ap pl i cat io n o f an y ru l e t h at

fu n ct i o n s t o “ m ec h a

nic a lly l i m i t ” d am ag es

. Jo hn Th u r mo n d & As s o c., In c.

, s u p ra, 2 8 4

Ga. at 4 7 3 (2 ). Fo r i ns t an ce, t here is n o “ i m m u t ab le ru l e t hat d am ag es m ay n ev er

ex ceed t h e fai r m ark et v al ue o f t h e p ro p ert y .” Id

. In st ead

, t h e g en eral p ri n ci pl e i s t h at

“ t h e co s t of rep ai r m

us t b e reas o n ab l e an d b ear s o m e pro p o rt i o n to t h e i n j u r y

s u s t ai n ed .” (Ci t at i o n om i t t ed

. ) I d

. a t 4 7 4 (2 ) n .5

. “ [T] h e m et h od o f cal cu l at i n g

d am ag es s h o u ld b e fl ex i b l e s o as t o reas o n ab l y co m p en s at e t h e i n

ju red p art y

, an d at

t h e s am e t i m e, b e fai r t o al l l it i g an t s .” Id . at 4 7 3 (2 ).

Here, H o rd o s t es t i fi ed t h at it i s g en eral l y m o re ex p en s i v e t o r e m o d el o r

“ rewo rk ” a h o m e t h an i t i s t o co n s t ru ct a h o m e. 3 Dav i s ag reed

, at tes t i n g t h a t “ t h ere

i s a b i g di fferen ce b et ween n ew co n s t ru ct i o n co s t [s ] an d rem ed i at io n an d rep ai r co s t s

3 Al s o

, Ho rd o s p rep ared an i n i t i al es ti m at e b u t t h en rev i s ed i t t o $ 2 1 6 ,7 9 8

b ecau s e t h e COVID p an d em i c h ad cau s ed a n i n c r e a s e i n th e co s t o f su p p l i es an d

l ab o r.

12b ecau s e of t h e n at ure o f t h e d am ag e an d t h e m et h o d s n eed ed t o co n du ct t h e rep ai rs .”

Sh e t es t i fi ed t h at

, fo r al l t h e rep ai rs i n d icat ed in h er rep o rt

, an es t i m at e o f $ 1 7 0 ,0 0 0

was “ p ro bab l y t h e w o rs t cas e s cen ari o

. ” Ho rd o s l at er t es t i fi ed in d et ai l reg ard i n g t h e

req u i rem en t s o f al l t h e m ajo r rep ai rs

, w h i ch

, p er h i s p rep ared es t im at e, am o u n t ed to

$ 1 6 7 ,9 2 8

. Fi rs t

, t h e en t i re dri v eway h ad t o b e rem o v ed b ecau s e i t w as p l aced i n t h e

wro ng area, i t was in co rrect l y i n s t al l ed “ as a wh o l e,” an d i t co u l d n ot b e rep ai red in

p o rt i on s

. Reg ard i n g t h e ro o f d rai n ag e, he t es ti fi ed t h at d o wn s po u t s an d g ut t ers h ad

t o b e rem o v ed an d rep i t ch ed

, tu b i n g h ad to p l a c e d i n t o t h e g ro u n d t o faci l i t at e t h e

d rai n ag e, an d t h en t h e area n eed ed t o b e reg rad ed

. Fu rt h er, t h ere were “ a l o t o f

s t ru ct u ral i s s u es ” wi t h t he g arag e, an d rep ai ri ng i t req u i red b u i l di n g t em p o rary wal l s

t o h o l d up t h e s t ru ct u re, t eari n g o u t t h e d ry wal l

, refram i n g t he g arag e, an d rei ns t al l i n g

t h e i n su l at i o n. Ho rd o s t es t i fi ed t h at p rep arat i o n fo r th e g arag e wo rk wo u l d b e “ v ery

t i m e-co n s u m i n g ” an d t h e wo rk “ i n ten s i v e” b ecau s e t he wal l s i n t h e g arag e i m p act ed

t h e en t i r e s t r u c t u re o f t he h o m e. In h i s v iew, th e wo o d fl o o ri n g was no t l ev el

, h e

co u ld no t “ p at ch wo rk i t ,” an d th e e n t i r e fl o o ri ng h ad t o b e rem o v ed

. He ad d ed t h at

t h e g l u e need ed t o b e s crap ed fro m t h e co n cret e, t h e area n eed e d t o b e s an d ed

, an d

n ew fl o o ri n g need ed t o b e rei n s tal l ed

. Ho rd o s fu rt h er t es t i fi ed at l en g t h o n t h e rep ai rs

req u i red fo r t he t ri m an d s i d i n g

, t h e s t on ewo rk aro un d th e h o m e, an d t h e at t i c. W h en

13we co n s id er Dav i s ’ i ns p ect i o n rep o rt an d t h e t es t i m o n y reg ard i ng t h e ex t en t an d t h e

i n t ri cacy o f t h e rep ai rs req u i red

, we co n cl u d e t h at t he co s t o f rep ai rs was reas o n ab l e

an d b o re s o m e p ro p o rt i o n t o t he Si m p s o n s ’ i n j u ry

. Th e ju d g m en t am o u n t was n eed ed

t o res t o re th e Si m

p s o ns to t h e p o s i t i o n t hat t h ey wo u l d hav e b een i n h ad Bi rch

Pro p ert i es p ro p erl y co n s t ru ct ed t h e h o u se, an d t h e award o f $ 1 5 6 ,6 2 0 was n ot

fl ag ran t ly ex ces si v e.

(b ) Seco n d

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es s u p p o s es t h at b ecau s e th e Si m p s on s hav e n o t y et

m ad e an y rep ai rs to t he h o m e, th ey wi l l n o t co m pl et e al l o f t h e rep ai rs fo r wh i ch t h ey

cl ai m ed d am ag es

, an d t h erefo re t h ey wi l l recei v e a wi n dfal l fo r it em s th at m ay n ev er

b e rem ed i ed

.

It i s ax i o m at i c t h at “ [t ] h is Co u rt wi l l n o t rev ers e cas es b as ed on s p ecu l at i o n [.] ”

In r e Es ta t e o

f Du n n , 2 3 6 Ga. Ap p . 2 1 1 , 2 1 2 (1 ) (b ) (5 1 1 SE2 d 5 7 5 ) (1 9 99 ). As t h e

ap p el l an t

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es b ears t h e b u rd en o f d em o n st rat i n g rev ers i b l e erro r fro m

t h e reco rd

, an d Bi rch Pro p ert ies i d en t i fi es n o ev i d e n c e t h at t he Si m p so n s d o n ot

i n t en d t o h av e th e rep ai rs perfo rm ed

. On t h e co n t rary

, Sh an n o n S i m p s o n p l ai n l y

t es t i fi ed t h at sh e was s ee k i n g d am ag es i n o rd er t o m ak e th e n eces s ary rep ai rs

.

Th erefo re, t h i s arg u m en t i s u nav ai l i ng

.

14(c) Nex t

, Bi rch Pro pert i es arg u es t hat t h e Si m ps o ns h av e b en efi t t ed fro m l i v i n g

i n th e h o m e fo r fo ur y ears wh i l e m ak i n g n o rep ai rs

, an d t h erefo re t h e d am ag es award

p l aces t h em i n a b et t er fi n an ci al p os i t i o n t h an i f t he co nt ract h ad n o t b een b reach ed

.

Th i s as s ert i o n i s u n t en ab l e u n d er t h e l aw.

Th e Si m p s o n s were en t i t l ed t o h av e t h e h o m e t h at t h ey co n t ract ed fo r i n t h e

fi rs t p l ace. S

ava n n a h In d

u s

. Co n s t r

. & E

q u i p . Ren t a l, In c. v. S

u mn er , 1 8 9 Ga. Ap p.

3 1 9

, 3 2 0 (3 7 5 SE2 d 4 8 6 ) (1 9 8 8 ). Had t h ey recei v ed t h e ho m e t h a t was p ro m i s ed

u n d er t h e co n t ract

, t h ey wo u ld h av e co n cei v a b l y b een l i v i n g i n i t al l al o ng

, ex cep t

t h at i t wo u ld h av e b een p ro p erl y co n s t ru ct ed

. In o t h er wo rd s

, t h e Si m p so n s s h o u l d

h a v e b een ab l e t o o ccu p y a p ro p erl y co n st ru ct ed h om e fro m t h e v ery b eg i n n i n g

.

Th erefo re, t h e award o f d am ag es i s “ i n t en ded to pl ace [t he Si m p s o n s ]

, as nearl y as

p o s s i b l e, i n t h e s am e p o s i t i o n t h ey wo u l d h av e b een i f t h e i n ju ry h ad n ev er o ccu rred .”

Jo h n Th u r mo n d & As s o c., In c.

, s u p ra, 2 8 4 G a. at 46 9 (1 ). Acco rd i n g l y

, we reject t h e

arg u m en t t h at t h e award p l aces t h e Si m p s o n s i n a b et t er fi nan ci al p o s i t i o n t han i f t h e

co n tract h ad n o t b een b reach ed

.

(d ) Las t l y

, Bi rch Pro p ert ies arg ues t h at

, i n s t ead o f u s i n g t h e co s t o f t h e rep ai rs

,

t h e t ri al co u rt s h o u ld h av e m eas u red t h e d am ag es b y as s es s in g t h e d ifferen ce i n t h e

v al u e o f th e h o m e as co n t ract ed a n d t h e p r o bab le v al u e o f t h e h o m e as co n s t ru ct ed

15(t he p ro b ab l e l o s s i n v al u e o f t h e h o m e). W e d i s ag ree b ecau s e Bi rch Pro p ert ies fai l ed

t o p res en t an y

ev i d en ce o n t h i s i s s ue.

Aft er a p l ai n t i ff p ro d u ces ev i d en ce s u p p ort i n g a cl ai m fo r d am ag es u n d er t h e

co s t of rep ai r m et h od

, “ t h e d efen d an t h as t h e b u rd en t o pres en t an y co n t rad i ct o ry

ev i d en ce ch al l en g i ng t h e reas on ab l en es s o r p ro p o rt i o n al i t y o f t h o s e d am ag es an d

wh ere ap p ro p ri at e, ev i d en ce o f an al t ern at i v e m eas u re o f d a m a g e s f or t h e [fact

fi nd er’ s ] co n s i d erat i on

. ” Jo h n Th u r mo n d & As s o c., In c.

, s u pra, 2 8 4 Ga. at 4 7 1 (1 ). To

t h i s en d

, th e b u rd en i s o n t h e co n t ract o r g u i l t y o f t h e b reach t o p ro v e th at t he “ award

o f rep ai r co s t s co n s t i t u t es eco n o m i c was t e.” (Ci t at i o n o m i t ted .) Id

. Al s o

, wh et h er t h e

rep ai r of a h o m e i s an “ ab s u rd u n d ert ak i n g ” is a q u es t i o n t o b e res o l v ed by t h e fact

fi nd er. (Ci t at i on o m i t t ed .) Id

.

In s o far as Bi rch Pro p ert i es n o w u rg es t hat t he t ri al co urt s ho u l d h av e award ed

d am ag es b y m eas uri n g t he d i m i n u t i o n i n th e v al u e o f t h e p ro p ert y

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es

b o re th e b urd en t o p ro v i de e v i d e n c e o n t h i s i s s u e. In i t s ap p el l at e bri ef, h o wev er,

Bi rch P r o p e r t i es ci t es n o ev id en ce wh at s o ev er reg ard i n g t h e p ro bab l e l o s s i n t h e

v al u e o f t h e h o m e. In fact

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es ex p l i ci tl y s tat es t h at t he v al u e o f t h e h o m e

as co n s t ru ct ed i s u n k n o wn

. A t t r i a l

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’ p o s i t i o n was l arg el y t h at t h e

rep ai rs co u l d b e co m

p let ed fo r s i g n i fi can t l y l es s t h an Ho rd o s ’ p ro p o s ed es t i m at e, n ot

16t h at t h e t ri al co u rt s ho u l d co n s i d er t he d i m i n i s hed v al u e of t h e pro p ert y as a m eas u re

o f d am ag es

. Co m

p are Ci ty o

f At l a nt a v

. C o n n er

, 2 6 2 Ga. Ap p

. 4 2 3

, 4 24 -4 2 5 (5 8 5

SE2 d 63 4 ) (2 0 0 3 ) (t ri al co u r t erred i n u si n g th e co s t o f rep ai rs as th e m eas u re o f

d am ag es wh ere b o t h p art i es ag reed t h at t h e h o u se was n o t s al v ag eab l e an d t hat i t was

i m p ract i cab l e to rep ai r i t ). T h u s

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es fai l ed t o carry i ts b u rd en o f

p res en t i ng ev i d e n c e o f a n al t ern at i v e m eas u re of d am ag es fo r t h e t ri al co urt ’ s

co n si d erat io n , an d we h av e n o reas o n t o d i s t u rb t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d am ag es award

.

3

. Nex t

, Bi rch Pro p e r t i es arg u es t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred by fai l i n g t o m ak e

fi nd i ng s or en t er an y “ v erd i ct ” o n i t s co u n t ercl ai m s

. A rev i ew o f th e reco rd

, h o wev er,

s h o ws t h at t h e t ri al co u rt p ro p erl y fi n al i zed i t s ju d g m en t as t o t h e Si m p s o n s ’

co m p l ai n t an d t h at Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’ co u n tercl ai m s rem ai n p en d in g

.

W h en m o re t h an o ne cl ai m fo r rel ief i s pres en t ed i n an act i o n

, wh et h er

as a c l a i m

, co u n tercl ai m

, cro s s -cl ai m

, or t h i rd -p art y cl ai m

, or wh en

m u l t i p l e p art ies are i nv o l v ed

, t h e co u rt m ay d i rect t h e en t ry of a fi nal

ju d g m en t as t o o ne o r m o re b u t fewer t han al l o f t h e cl ai m s o r p art i e s

o n l y u p o n an ex pres s d et erm i n at i on t hat t h ere i s n o ju s t reas o n fo r d el ay

an d u p o n an ex pres s d i rect i o n fo r t h e en t ry o f ju d g m en t

.

OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 4 (b ). Th i s s tat u t e “ ex pres s l y ap p l i es t o b o t h c l a i m s an d

co u nt ercl ai m s .” Co xwel l Tr act o r & E q u i p

. S a l es

, In c. v. Bu r

g es s

, 1 9 2 Ga. Ap p

. 6 6 3,

176 6 4 (2 ) (3 8 5 SE2 d 7 5 3 ) (1 9 8 9). Here, t he t ri al co u rt ex p res s l y d et erm i n ed t h at t h ere

was n o ju s t reas o n fo r d el ay an d d irect ed t h e en t ry o f a fi n al ju d g m en t so l el y o n t h e

Si m p s o n s ’ cl ai m s

. W e are aware o f n o au t h o ri t y

— an d Bi rch Pro p ert i es h as n ot

i d en t i fi ed an y

— wh i ch prev en t s a t r i a l co u rt fro m cert ify i n g i t s ju dg m en t u n d er

OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 4 (b ) aft er a b en ch tri al

. See, e.g

., Un der wo o d v. D u n n

, 2 1 5 Ga. Ap p.

2 5 2 (4 51 SE2 d 1 2 9 ) (1 9 9 4) (cas e rem ai n ed p en d i n g b el o w aft er t h e b en ch t ri al p art l y

b ecau s e t h e t ri al co u rt di d n o t d i rect t h e en t ry o f a fi n al ju d g m en t u n d er OCGA § 9

-

1 1 -5 4 (b )). In d eed

, t he v ery reas o n th at we h av e ju ri sd i ct i o n o v er Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’

d i rect ap p eal i s b ecau s e t h e t r i a l co u rt lawfu ll y fi n al i zed th e j u d gm en t as t o t h e

Si m p s on s ’ co m

p l ai n t

. S a m’s W h o l es al e Cl ub v. Ri l ey

, 24 1 Ga. Ap p

. 6 93

, 6 95 (1 ) (5 2 7

SE2 d 2 9 3) (1 9 9 9).

Rel at ed ly

, w e reject Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’ arg u m en t th at th e t ri al co u rt ’ s “ v erd i ct ”

ran afo ul o f OCGA § 9 -1 2 -1 becau s e i t d i d n o t res o l v e al l th e i s s u es i n t h e cas e.

OCGA § 9 -1 2 -1 p r o v i d e s t h at “ [t ] h e v erd i ct s h al l co v er t h e i s s u es m ad e b y t h e

p l ead i n g s an d s hal l be fo r th e p l a i n t i ff o r fo r t h e defen d an t

. ” W e h av e l o n g h el d,

h o wev er, t h at “ t h ere is n o v erd i c t i n a b e n ch t ri al

. ” Mea ch a m v. Fr a n kl i n -Hea r d

C o u n ty W

a t er Au t h.

, 3 0 2 G a. Ap p

. 6 9

, 7 4 (1 ) (6 90 SE2 d 1 8 6 ) (2 0 0 9 ). Co m p are

Ber n a t h Ba r r el & Dr u m Co

., In c. v. Os tr um Bo i l er Svc., In c.

, 1 3 1 Ga. Ap p. 14 0

, 1 4 4

18(1 ) (2 0 5 SE2 d 4 5 9 ) (1 9 7 4 ) (wh ere t h e ju ry en t ered a v erd i ct fo r t he p l ai n ti ff i n t h e

s u m s u ed fo r an d d i d n o t referen ce t h e co u n tercl ai m

, th e verd i ct was to be co n s t ru ed

as d eci di n g ag ai n s t t h e d e f e n d an t ’ s co un t ercl ai m ) (p h y s i cal p reced en t o n l y ). Th u s

,

i n s o far as Bi rch Pro pert i e s c o n t e n d s t h at th e tri al co u rt ’ s ju d g m en t i s s t at u t o ri l y

d efi ci en t u n der OCGA § 9 -1 2 -1 , t h i s cl ai m n eces s ari l y fai l s

.

Th i rd

, a rev i ew o f t h e reco rd s h ows t hat Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’ co un t ercl ai m s are

s t il l p en d i n g becau s e t h e t ri al co urt h as n o t ru l ed o n th em

. Bi rch Pro p ert i es

co u nt ercl ai m ed fo r t h e w ro n g fu l a t t e m p t ed t erm i n at i o n o f co n t ract

, b reach o f

co n tract

, an d at t o rn ey fees

. Sp eci fi cal l y

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es cl ai m ed t h at t h e Si m p s on s

p rev en ted t h e co m

p an y fro m co m

p l et i n g t h e fu l l p erfo rm an ce o f i t s o b l i g at i o n s an d

fai l ed t o p ay fo r ad d i t i on al m o d i fi cat i o n s i n t h e am o u n t o f $ 26 ,3 4 2

. 4 5

. 4 At t ri al

, t h e

t ri al co u rt ex p l ici t l y referen ced an d t o o k ev i d en ce o n t h e co u n t ercl ai m s

. It s ju d g m en t

,

h o wev er, m ak es no m en t io n o f t h e co u n tercl ai m s

. Al t h ough a t ri al co u rt can imp l i ci t l y

reject a co u n t ercl ai m

, t h ere i s n o t h i n g i n t h e ju d g m en t t h at au to m at i cal ly p recl u d es

al l of Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’ co u n t ercl ai m s

. Fo r in s t an ce, al t h o ug h th e t ri al co u rt award ed

4 Al t h o u g h t h e S i m

p s o n s arg u e t h at t h e co u n t ercl ai m s are n o t cred i b l e, t h e

v i ab i l i t y o f t h e co u n t e r c l ai m s h as n o b eari ng o n t h e fact t h at t h ey rem ai n p en d i n g

u n t i l a ru li n g i s o b t ai ned

. Y a t es v. CACV o

f Co l o ra d

o

, LLC

, 2 95 Ga. A p p

. 6 9

, 6 9 -7 0

(6 7 0 SE2 d 8 8 4) (2 0 0 8) (co u n t ercl ai m was p en d i n g reg ard l es s o f wh et her i t was

wi t h o u t m eri t , p ro ced u ral ly u n au t h o ri zed , ab an d o n ed , o r wai ved ).

19t h e Si m

p s o n s dam ag es o n t hei r b reach o f co n tract cl ai m

, t h i s d id n o t p recl u d e Bi rch

Pro p ert i es ’ co u n tercl ai m fo r breach o f co n tract

. It i s en ti rel y p o s s i bl e fo r b ot h p art i es

t o n o t fu l fi l l t h ei r o b l i g at i o n s u n d er a co ns t ru ct i o n co n t ract

. See Di l l v. Ch a s t a i n

, 2 3 4

Ga. A p p. 7 7 0

, 7 71 (5 0 7 SE2 d 8 7 2 ) (1 9 98 ). An d , t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d es i g n at i on o f t h e

ju d g m e n t a s “ fi n al ” d o es n o t m ean t h at th e co un t ercl ai m s were n eces s ari l y

ad ju d i cat ed

. Rh

ymes v. Ea st At l a n t a Ch u r ch Of Go d, In c.

, 2 8 4 Ga. 1 45

, 1 46 -1 4 7 (6 6 3

SE2 d 67 0 ) (2 0 0 8 ). Th u s

, we can n o t p res u m e t h at t he tri al c o u r t d i s p o s ed o f t h e

co u nt ercl ai m s wh en n ot hi n g i n t h e ju d g m en t ex p res s l y o r i m p l i ed l y s ho ws t h at t h es e

cl ai m s were res o l ved

. Id

. at 1 46 (o t h er cl ai m s w ere s t i l l p en d i n g wh ere “ [n ] o t h i n g in

[t he] o rd er ex p res s l y

, o r b y n eces s ary i m pl i cat i o n

, co n s ti tu t e[d ] an ad ju d i cat i o n o f t h e

o t h er cl ai m s ”). Co m

p are Ma n cu s o v. Ja cks o n

, 3 59 Ga. Ap p. 42 8

, 4 3 0 n .3 (8 5 8 SE2 d

2 4 4 ) (2 0 2 1 ) (t ri al co u rt sp eci fi cal l y m en t i o ned co u n t ercl ai m s i n i t s o rd er an d m ad e

fi nd i ng s t h at p recl u ded t h e co u n t ercl ai m s ); Mo sl ey v. Lo an S er vi ci n g En t er

p r i s e

, 2 4 1

Ga. Ap p

. 1 8 2 (5 2 5 SE2 d 3 8 1 ) (1 9 9 9 ) (ap p aren t fro m t h e o r d e r th at t h e t ri al co u rt

co n si d ered t h e co un t ercl ai m ). Acco rd i n gl y

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’ co un t ercl ai m s rem ai n

20p e n d i n g

, an d we h av e n o cau s e t o rev ers e t he t ri al co urt ’ s o rd er on th e b as i s t h a t i t

fai l ed t o ad d res s t hem

. 5

4

. N ex t, Bi rch Pro pert i es arg u es t h at t he t ri al co u r t e r r e d b y al l o w i ng ex p ert

t es t i m o ny fro m H o rd o s b ecau s e m u ch o f h i s t es t im o n y o n t he s p eci fi c rep ai r am o u n t s

was b as ed o n co nv ers at i on s wi t h s u b co n t ract o rs

, an d h e was m erel y a co n du i t fo r t h e

o p i n i o n s o f o th er in d i v i du al s

. T h i s arg u m en t fai l s b ecau s e ev en i f t h i s t es t i m o n y was

i n ad m is s i b le, Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’ s u b s t an t i al ri gh t s were n o t affect ed

.

W e are co g ni zan t t h at “ [a] wi t n es s’ o p in i o n m u s t be h i s o wn an d h e can n o t act

as a m ere co n du i t fo r t h e o p i n i o n s o f ot h ers .” (Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed .) U n i f i e d Go vt

. of

At h en s -Cl a r

ke Co u n t y v. W a t s o n

, 2 5 5 G a. Ap p

. 1, 4 (2 ) (5 6 4 SE2 d 4 5 3) (2 0 0 2 ).

Nev ert h el es s

, “ [u ] n der t h e n ew Ru l es o f Ev i den ce, i f a p art y d oes n ot p ro p erl y o b ject

t o h ears ay

, t he o b

j ect io n s h al l b e d eem ed wai v ed

, an d t h e h ears ay ev i d en ce s h al l b e

l eg al ev id en ce an d ad m i ss i b l e.” To r r es v. Ci t y o f Jo n es b o r o

, 3 5 4 G a. Ap p. 8 7 4

, 8 7 6

(2 ) (8 42 SE2 d 7 5 ) (2 0 2 0 ) (ci t i n g OCGA § 2 4 -8 -8 0 2 ). “ Th e co n t e m p o ran eo u s

o b ject i on ru l e p ro v id es t h at co u n s el m u s t t ak e ex cep t io n t o t h e al l eg e d e r r o r at t h e

5 W e al s o n o t e t h at t he ju d gm en t d o es n o t m en t io n H u s fel d’ s co u n t ercl ai m

. Hu s fel d cl ai m ed t hat th e act io n ag ai n st hi m i n h i s i n d i v i d u al cap aci t y l ack ed

s u b s t an t i al ju s t i fi cat i on

, an d, as m en t i o n ed ab o v e, t h e t ri al co u rt fo u nd i n Hu s fel d ’ s

fav o r o n t h e n eg l i gen t co n s t ru ct i o n cl ai m

.

21ea r l i es t p o s s i b l e o p po r t u n i t y i n t h e p ro g res s o f t h e cas e b y a p ro p er o bject i o n m ad e

a p art o f t h e reco rd .” (Ci t at i o n an d pu n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ; em p h as i s i n o ri g i n al .) Id

. See

al s o Fi r ma n i v. Da r -Co u r t Bu i ld er s

, LLC

, 3 3 9 Ga. Ap p

. 4 1 3, 42 1 (2 ) (7 93 SE2 d 5 9 6 )

(2 0 1 6) (t o p res erv e an i s s u e fo r ap p eal

, a p a rt y m u s t m ak e a t i m el y m o t i o n o r

o b ject i on t h at i s co n t e m

p o r a n eo u s wi t h t h e i n t ro d u ct io n o f t h e ev i d en ce). Bi rch

Pro p ert i es d i d n o t o b

j ect t o Ho rd o s ’ t es t i m o n y o n t h e q u o t ed am o un t s i n t h e es t i m at e.

Th erefo re, Bi rch Pro p ert i es h as fo rfei t ed o rd i n ary rev i ew o f t h i s cl ai m

.

Fu rt h er, al t h o u g h p lai n erro r rev i ew ap p l i es t o ev id en t iary erro rs i n ci vi l cas es

,

Th o ma s v. Al l i

g o od

, 3 5 8 Ga. A p p

. 7 0 3

, 7 1 2 (2 ) (b ) (8 5 6 SE2 d 8 0 ) (2 0 21 ), Bi rch

Pro p ert i es d oes n o t d em o n s t rat e p l ai n erro r b as ed o n t h e ad m is s i o n of Ho r d o s ’

t es t i m o ny

.

In o rd er t o d em o ns t rat e p l a i n erro r b as ed u p o n t h e ad m is s i o n o f

e v i d en ce, an ap pel l an t m u s t s h o w an erro r o r d efect t h at h as n o t b e e n

affi rm at iv el y wai v ed b y t h e ap p el l an t

, th at i s cl ear o r o b vi ou s

, an d t hat

affect ed t h e ap p el l an t ’ s s u b s t an t i al ri g h t s b y affect i ng the out co m e o f th e

t ri al co u rt p ro ceed in g s ; i f t h es e t h ree req ui rem en t s are s at i s fi ed

, we h av e

t h e d i scret i o n t o r e m e d y t h e erro r b ut s h o u l d d o s o o n l y i f t h e erro r

s e r i o u s l y affect s t h e fai rn es s

, i n teg ri t y o r p u b l i c rep ut at io n of ju d i ci a l

p ro ceed i n g s

.

22Id

. at (2 ) (c). Here, wh en t h e Si m p s o ns m o ved t o ad m i t t h e ex h i b i t d ep i ct in g Ho rd o s ’

es t i m at e fo r t h e rep a i r s

, c o u ns el fo r Bi rch Pro pert i es s aw t he es t i m at e an d t wi ce

s t at ed

, “ I’ m n o t g o i n g t o o b ject .” Th erefo re, t h ere was n o p l ai n erro r i n t h e ad m i s s i o n

o f t h e ex h i b it i t s el f. M

cAl l is t er v. S ta t e

, 3 5 1 Ga. Ap p

. 7 6

, 8 8 (3 ) (8 3 0 SE2 d 4 4 3 )

(2 0 1 9) (p l ai n erro r was i n ap p l i cab l e wh ere co u n s el s aw t h e ex h i b i ts an d t w i ce s t at ed

t h at h e h ad n o o b

ject i o n t o ei t h er ex h i b it ). Acco rd i n g ly

, ev en if Ho rd o s ’ t e s t i m o ny

as t o t h e s p eci fi c rep ai r am ou n t s was i n ad m i s s i b l e, th e es t i m at e was pro p erl y i n cl u d ed

i n t h e ev id en ce fo r t h e t ri al co urt ’ s co n s i d erat i o n

, an d Ho rd os o p in ed t h at al l o f t h e

i t em i zed rep ai rs s t em m ed fro m s u b s t an d ard co ns t ru ct i o n

. Th erefo re, Ho rd o s ’

t es t i m o ny d i d n ot affect Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’ s u b s t an t i al ri g h t s, an d t h ere i s n o b as i s to

d i s t u rb t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s ju dg m en t b as ed o n Ho rd o s ’ ex p er t t e s t i m o n y

. See Th o ma s

,

s u p ra, 3 5 8 Ga. Ap p

. at 7 1 2 (2 ) (c) (ex pl ai n i n g t h at “ becau s e ci v il cas es d o n ot

o rd i n ari ly i n vo k e th e v io l at i o n o f a co n s t i t u t i o nal ri g h t o r t h e d en i al o f l i b ert y i t i s far

l es s l ik el y t hat p lai n erro r wi l l b e i d en t i fi ed i n t h e c i v il co n t ex t ”) (ci tat i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed ).

5

. Nex t

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es a r g u e s t h at t he Si m p s on s wai v ed t h ei r cl ai m fo r

d a m a g es t o t h e d ri v eway b ecau s e t h ey m o di fi ed i t

. In Bi rch Pro pert i es ’ vi e w

, t h e

Si m p s on s i n t en t io n al l y p o u red ad d i t i o n al co n cret e th at m at ch ed t h e el ev at io n o f t h e

23ex i s t in g d ri v eway

, wh ich p rev en t ed Bi rch Pro p ert i es f r o m r e m oving the dr i ve w ay an d

m ad e i t m o re e x p en si v e fo r Bi rch Pro p ert i es t o m ak e th e n eces sary rep ai rs

. 6 W e

co n cl u d e t h at t h e Si m

p s o ns d i d n o t wai v e t h ei r cl ai m as t o t h e d ri v eway

.

It i s wel l reco g n i zed t hat a p art y t o a co n t ract m ay w a i v e co n t ract ual

p ro v i s i o n s fo r h i s b en efi t

. A w a i v e r m ay b e sh o w n t h ro u g h a p art y ’ s

co n d u ct . Bu t t h e l aw wi ll n o t i n fer t h e wai v er o f an i m p ort an t co n tract

ri gh t u n l es s t h e wai v er i s cl ear an d u n m i s t ak ab le. An d becau s e wai v er

i s n o t fav o red u n d er t h e l aw, t h e ev i d en ce rel i ed u p o n t o p ro v e a wai v er

m u s t be s o cl earl y i n d i cat i v e o f a n i n t en t t o rel i n qu i s h a th en k no wn

p art i cu l ar ri g h t o r b en efi t as to ex cl u d e an y o t her reas o n ab l e

ex p l an at i on

. In d eed

, al l t h e at ten d an t fact s

, tak en t o g et her, m u s t am o u n t

t o an i n t en t i o n al rel i n q ui s h m en t of a k n o wn ri g h t

, i n o rd er th at a wai v er

m ay ex i st . Th e b u rd en o f p ro o f l i es wi t h t h e p art y as s ert in g wai v er.

6 Bi rch Pro p ert i es a p p aren tl y m ak es a fl eet i n g arg u m en t th at t h e Si m p s on s

accep t ed t h e d ri v eway as co n s t ru ct ed an d t h at accep t an ce o f go o d s wi t h k n o wl ed g e

o f d efect s co n s t i t u tes a wai v er o f t h e warran t y. A s s u m i n g t h at th i s p ri n ci p l e ev en

ap p li es i n co n s t ru ct i o n d efect cas es , t h e cas es o n wh i ch Bi rch Pro p ert i es rel i es p red at e s t at u t o ry l aw o n t h i s i s su e. Un d er cu rren t l aw, “ a bu y er can reco v er d am ag es fo r

b reach o f warran t y or b reach o f co n tract ev en t h o u g h t h e b u y er accep t ed t h e d efect i v e

g o o d s

, ” p r o v i d e d t h at t h e b u y er reas o n ab l y n ot i fi es t he s el l er of t he d efect s, in

co m p l ian ce wi t h s t at ut e. At wo o d v. S o ut h ea s t Bed

d i n g Co

. , In c.

, 2 2 6 Ga. Ap p

. 5 0

, 5 2

(1 ) (4 8 5 SE2 d 2 1 7 ) (1 9 9 7 ) (ci t i n g OCGA § § 1 1-2 -6 0 7 (3 ) (a), 1 1 -2 -7 1 4 ). Here,

wi t h i n week s o f m o v i ng i n to t h e h o m e, th e Si m p s o n s n ot i fi ed Bi rch Pro p ert i es

, in

wri t in g

, o f m

u l t i p le i s s ues wi t h t h e d ri v eway

. A b s en t an y a r g u m en t fro m Bi rch

Pro p ert i es

, we h av e n o reas o n t o b el i ev e t h at t h e Si m p s on s ’ n o t i ce t o Bi rch Pro p ert i es

was i n s u ffi ci en t s o as t o b ar reco v ery as t o t h e d ri v eway

.

24(Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed .) Och o a v. Co l d wa t er Cr eek Ho meo wn er

s As s n

. In c.

, 3 6 1 Ga. Ap p.

2 6 7 , 2 7 0 (1 ) (8 6 3 SE2 d 7 30 ) (2 0 2 1 ). Th e reco rd i n t h is cas e d o es no t s h ow t h at t h e

Si m p s on s cl earl y an d un m i s t a k a b l y rel i n q u i sh ed a ri gh t t o cl ai m d am ag es fo r t h e

d ri v eway

. Bri an Si m

p s o n t es t i fi ed t h at h e d i d n o t m ak e a n y ch an g es t o t h e o ri g i n al

d ri v eway

, t h at h e p o u red co ncret e a dj a cen t t o t h e dri v eway

, an d t h at h e d i d n o t k n o w

wh et h er t h e ad d i t i o n a l c o n c ret e was p o u red to t h e s am e el ev at io n as th e ex i s t i n g

d ri v eway

. In es s en ce, Bi rch Pro p ert i es h as n ot d em o n s trat ed t h at Si m p s o n k new t h at

,

b y p o u ri n g co n cret e ad

jacen t t o t h e ex i s t i n g d ri v eway

, h e wo u l d p ot en t i al l y p rev en t

Bi rch Pro p ert i es fro m rem o v i n g t h e ex i s t i n g d ri v eway o r m ak e i t m o re ex pen s i v e fo r

Bi rch Pro p ert i es to m ak e t h e n eces s ary rep ai rs

. See Och o a

, s u p ra, 3 6 1 Ga. Ap p

. at

2 7 0 (1 ) (“ W h ere t h e on l y ev id en ce o f a n i n t e n t i o n t o wai ve i s wh at a part y d o es []

,

t h ere i s n o wai v er u n l es s h i s act s

. . . are s o ma n i f es t l y co n s i s t en t wi t h an i n t en t to

rel i n qu i sh a t h en -k no wn p art i cu l ar r i g h t o r b en efi t t hat no o t her reas o n ab l e

ex p lan at i o n o f t he co nd u ct i s p o s s i b l e.”) (ci t at io n o m i tt ed ; em p h as i s s up p li ed ).

6

. Las t ly

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es arg u es t hat t h e t ri al co u rt erred by award i ng at t o rn ey

fees t o t h e Si m

p s o n s u n d er O CGA § 1 3

- 6

- 1 1

. W e co n cl u d e t h at t h e ev i d en ce

au t h o ri zed t h e t ri al co u rt t o g ran t an at t o rn ey fee award u n d er O CGA § 1 3-6 -1 1

, b ut

t h at t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n t o award t h e fees i n a l u m p s u m am o u nt was erro r.

25“ At t o rn ey fees are reco v erab l e u n der OCGA § 1 3 -6 -1 1 wh en a p art y h as act ed

i n b ad fai th

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

, o r h as s u b ject ed t h e o t h er p art y to

u n n eces sary t ro u bl e an d ex p en s e.” (Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed .) Ci t y of Li l b u r n v. As t r a Gr

p

.,

In c. , 2 8 6 Ga. Ap p . 5 6 8, 5 7 0 (6 4 9 SE2 d 8 1 3 ) (2 0 0 7).

Th e i s s u e o f at t o rn ey fees u n d er OCGA § 1 3-6 -1 1 i s a q u es ti o n fo r t he

[fact fi n der]

, an d an award w i l l be u ph el d i f an y ev i den ce i s p r e s en ted

t o su p po rt th e award

. Ho wev er, a p l ai n t i ff i s en ti t l ed t o reco v er at t o rn ey

fees on l y fo r th at po rt i o n o f th e fees wh i ch are al l o cab l e to th e at to rn ey ’ s

effo rt s t o p ro s ecu t e a s u cces s fu l cl ai m ag ai n s t a d efen d an t

.

Pr emi er Ca b i n et s , In c. v. Bu l a t , 2 61 Ga. Ap p. 57 8

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

“ [O] b t a i n i n g s om e b u t l es s t han al l o f t h e rel i ef s o u gh t i s s uffi ci en t t o au t h o ri ze an

award o f at t o rn ey fees .” Ma gn et i c Res on a n ce P l u s, In c. v. Ima gi n g S ys

. In t l

. , 2 7 3 Ga.

5 2 5 , 5 2 8 (3 ) (5 4 3 SE2 d 3 2) (2 00 1 ).

(a) Fi rs t

, we d et erm in e t hat t h ere was an ev i d en t i ary b as i s fo r t h e at t o rn ey fee

award

.

Hu s fel d k n ew t h at t h e pu n ch l i s t i n cl u d ed i t em s t h at were ei th er i n co m p l et e o r

i n co rrect l y co m

p l et ed

, he as s u red th e Si m ps o n s t h at th e i t em s wo u ld b e res o l v ed

, an d

h e al so recei v ed Dav i s ’ rep ort

. A cco rd i n g l y

, t h ere was ev i d en ce t hat Bi rch Pro p ert i es

was en t i rel y aware of t h e ex i s t en ce of co ns t ru ct i o n d efect s i n an d aro u n d t h e h o m e.

26Hu s fel d al s o ack n o w l ed g ed t h at t he r e r e m a ine d d i s p u t es reg ard i n g o u t s t an di n g i s s u es

wi t h t h e co n s t ru ct i o n u p t o fo u r m o n t h s aft er h e recei v ed t h e p u n ch l i s t

. Th ere was

al s o ev i d en ce t hat Bi rch Pro p ert i es co n t i n u ed t o m ak e in s u ffi ci en t rep ai rs t o t h e

h o m e. Fo r i n s t an ce, p u t t y w as pl aced o n t h e wo o d fl o o ri n g

, b u t i t “ cru m b led an d fel l

o u t ,” an d a s h i m was p l aced in t h e k i t ch en b u t i t “ p u l l ed ri g h t b ack t o w ard t h e wal l .”

Bri an Si m

p s on t es t i fi ed t h at

, ev en aft er s ev eral m o nt h s

, Bi rch Pro p ert i es i n s i s t ed o n

o fferi n g “ b an d -ai d ” s o l u t i on s fo r p erv ad i n g i s s ues i n t h e h o m e, an d t h ere were

n u m ero u s o t h e r rep ai rs t h at were n ev er i ni t i at ed

. Sh an no n Si m p s on ex pl ai n ed t h at

Hu s fel d o ft en t o l d h er t h at rep ai r p ers o n n el wo u l d co m e t o t h e h o m e, t h at t h ey wo u ld

n ev er arri v e, an d t h at ev en tu al l y

, s h e “ ju s t h ad en o u gh .” T h en

, aft er t h e Si m p s on s

ack n owl ed ged t hat th e p art i es rem ai n ed at an i m p as se an d o ffered t o s et t l e t he m at t er,

Bi rch Pro p ert i es refu s ed

. T h u s

, t h ere was s o m e ev i den ce au t ho ri zi n g t h e t ri al co urt ’ s

award o f at t o rn ey fees u nd er OCGA § 1 3 -6 -1 1

. Cl ea r wa t er Co n s t r

. Co

. v. McCl u n g

,

2 6 1 Ga. Ap p

. 7 8 9

, 7 9 2 (5 84 SE2 d 61 ) (2 0 0 3 ) (at t o rn ey fees al l o wed u n d er OCGA §

1 3 -6 -1 1 wh ere t he co n s t ru ct i o n co m p an y fai l ed t o t ak e t h e s t ep s n eces s ary t o rep ai r

t h e i n s u l at i o n s y s t em an d ad d res s al l o f th e p ro b lem s wi t h t h e i n s t al l at i o n

, fu rt h er

d am ag e t o th e s y s t em an d t h e h o m e o ccu rred

, an d t h e p art ies were “ at l o g g erh ead s ”

as t o wh at was neces s ary t o rem ed y t h e ack n o wl ed g ed p ro b l em s wi t h t he s y s t em ). See

27al s o Ch a r t er Dr ywa l l At l a n t a

, In c. v. Di sco ver y Tech

., In c., 2 7 1 Ga. Ap p

. 5 1 4

, 5 1 7

(2 ) (6 1 0 SE2 d 1 4 7) (2 0 0 5 ) (at to rn ey fees al l o wed fo r s t u b bo rn l i t i g i o u s n es s wh ere

t h ere w as n o b on a fi d e co n tro v ers y as t o t h e d ry wal l co m p an y ’ s fai l u re t o co m

p l et e

t h e wo rk ad eq u at el y

, an d t here was ev i d en ce o f t h e co m pan y ’ s i n s is t en ce o n p u rs u i n g

p ro t ract ed l i t i g at i o n ). 7

(b ) Bi rch Pro p er t i e s a l s o cl ai m s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n fai l i n g t o m ak e

fi nd i ng s o f fact an d co n cl u si o ns o f l aw as t o t h e at t orn ey fee award

. Th i s arg u m en t

h as b een wai v ed

.

As d i s cu s s ed ab o v e, Bi rch Pro p ert ies fai l ed t o req u e s t f i n d i n g s o f fact an d

co n cl u s i o n s o f law u n d er OCGA § 9-1 1 -5 2

. Ha mp s hi r e Ho mes

, In c. v. Es p i n os a

Co n s t r

. S vcs

., In c.

, 2 8 8 Ga. Ap p

. 7 1 8, 72 4 (3 ) (6 5 5 SE2 d 3 16 ) (2 0 0 7) (ap p el l an t

wai v ed i ts arg um en t t h at t h e t ri al co u rt fai l ed t o m ak e fi n d i n g s o n an at t orn ey fee

award u n d er OCGA § 1 3-6 -1 1 b ecau s e t h e ap p el l an t d i d n ot m ak e a p o s t -ju d g m en t

m o ti o n ch al l en g i n g t h e s u ffi ci en cy o f th e t ri al co u rt ’ s fi n di ng s ). Co m p are Pa r l a n d v.

7 Bi rch Pro p ert i es i n s i s t s t h a t t h ere was a b on a fi d e co nt ro v ers y reg ard i n g

d am ag es

, wh i ch p recl u d ed t he cl ai m fo r at t o rn ey fees

. No n et h el es s

, a fact fi n d er “ m ay

award at t o rn ey fees u n der OCGA § 1 3 -6 -1 1 i f t h ere i s n o b o na fi d e co n t ro v ers y as to

l i ab i l i t y

, ev en i f th ere i s a bo n a fi d e co n t ro vers y as t o d am ag es

. ” Da n i el v. Smi t h

, 2 6 6

Ga. Ap p

. 6 3 7

, 6 41 (3 ) (5 9 7 SE2 d 4 3 2 ) (2 0 04 ); Ho r t o n v. D en n i s

, 32 5 Ga. Ap p

. 2 1 2,

2 1 6 (7 50 SE2 d 4 9 3 ) (2 0 1 3 ) (s am e).

28Mi l l en n iu m Co n s t r

. S vcs

. , LLC

, 2 7 6 Ga. Ap p

. 5 9 0, 5 9 3 (6 2 3 S E 2 d 6 7 0 ) (2 0 0 5 )

(req ui ri n g fi nd in g s of fact an d co n cl u si o n s o f l aw o n t he award u n d er OCGA § 1 3 -6

-

1 1 b u t n o t ad d res si n g wai v er). 8

(c) Nev ert h el es s, w e ag ree wi t h Bi rch Pro p ert ies t h at t he tri al co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n

t o award t h e at t o rn e y f

e e s i n a l u m

p s u m am o u n t co n st i tu t es erro r. Th erefo re we

rev ers e t h e awar d an d rem an d t h i s cas e fo r an ev i d en t i ary h eari n g t o al l o w t h e

Si m p s on s t o es t ab l i s h t h e p o rt i o n o f th e fees wh i ch i s al lo cab l e t o t h ei r at t o rn ey ’ s

p ro s ecu ti o n o f t hei r s u cces s fu l cl ai m s

.

Th e Si m p s o n s h ad t h e b u rd en o f p ro o f o n t h e is s u e o f at t o rn ey fees

, an d t h ey

were req u i red to s eg reg at e o u t t h e h o urs t h at were reco v erab l e fro m t h os e h o u rs t h at

were un reco verab l e. Pr emi er Ca b i n et s

, In c.

, s u p ra, 2 61 Ga. Ap p

. at 5 8 2 (5 ). At t ri al

,

h o wev er, t h e Si m

p so n s m erel y p ro v ed t h e t o t al am o u n t o f at t orn ey fees in cu rred

, an d

8 W e ack n o wl ed g e, ho wev er, th at wh ere a t ri al co u rt en ters an at t o rn ey fee

award u n d er OCGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4

, fi n d i n g s o f fact an d co n cl us i o ns o f l aw are m an d at ed

an d w ai v er i s i n ap pl i cab l e. Gi l ch r i s t v. Gi lch r i s t

, 28 7 Ga. Ap p. 1 3 3, 13 3 -1 3 4 (1 ) (6 5 0

SE2 d 7 9 5) (2 0 0 7). A l t ho u g h Bi rch Pro p ert ies u rg es t h e Co u rt t o ad o p t t h i s ap p ro ach

i n t h i s cas e, we wi ll n o t d o s o

. OCGA § 1 3 -6 -1 1 p ro v i d e s f o r at t o rn ey fees an d

l i ti g at i o n ex p en s es as co mp en s a t o r y d a ma g es

, wh i ch wo u ld o t herwi s e b e award ed by

a j u ry as p art o f t h e v erd i ct

, wh i l e OCGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4 p ro v id es fo r an award o f at t o rn ey

fees as a co u rt -o rd ered s a n ct io n

. Ju n i o r v. Gr a h a m

, 3 1 3 G a. 4 20

, 4 2 5 (2 ) (b ) (2 0 2 2 )

(8 7 0 SE2 d 3 78 ); Hi l l v. D o e

, 2 3 9 Ga. Ap p

. 8 6 9 (2 ) (5 2 2 SE2 d 4 7 1 ) (1 9 99 ). Gi v en t h e

d i fferi n g n at ure o f t h es e at t o rn ey fees

, we wi ll n o t d ep art fro m t h i s Co u rt ’ s p reced en t

o n t h e i s s u e o f wai v er.

29n o ev i den ce was p res en t ed fro m wh ich t h e t ri al co urt co u l d d et erm i n e wh at p o rt i o n

was at t ri b u t ab l e s o l el y t o p ro s ecu t i n g t h ei r s u c c es s fu l cl ai m s

. 9 Th ei r co u n sel ’ s

acco u n t s t at em en t del eg at ed v ari o u s fees t o d i fferen t t as k s p erfo rm ed

, b u t i t was n ot

o f “ s u ffi ci en t p art i cu l ari t y t o p erm i t t h e [t h e t ri al co u rt ] t o di s t i n gu i s h b et ween t i m e

an d ex p en s es at tri b u t ab l e to [t h e] s u cces s fu l c l a i m [ s ] an d t i m e an d ex p en s es

at t ri b u t ab l e t o t h e p u rs u it o f [t h e] u n su cces s fu l cl ai m an d t he defen s e o f [t h e]

co u nt ercl ai m [s ] .” Id

. Co u ns el ’ s t es t i m o n y at t ri al reg ard i n g t h e fees i n cu rred was n o

m o re i l l um i n at i n g

. Th erefo re, “ [u ] nd er t h e s t at e o f t h e ev i d en ce i n t h e p res en t cas e,

t h e [t ri al co u rt ] w o u l d h av e b een fo rced i n to a p o s t u re o f p u re s p ecu l at i o n as t o wh i ch

fees were at tri bu t ab l e s o l el y t o p ro s ecu t i n g [t h e] s u cces s fu l cl ai m [s ] .” Id

.

C ontrary t o t h e Si m

p s o n s’ arg u m en t

, Bi rch Pro pert i es h as n o t w a ive d this c la im

o f erro r b y b ei n g d erel i ct i n i t s cro s s -ex am i n at i o n or by fai l i n g t o req u es t fi n d i n g s o f

fact an d co n cl u s i o n s o f l aw. Th e award o f at t o rn ey fees i n t h i s cas e i s “ co n t rary t o t h e

l aw” a n d s i m

p l y “ can no t b e u p h el d as au t h o ri zed p u rs u an t t o OCGA § 1 3 -6 -1 1.”

Pr emi er Ca b i n et

s

, In c.

, s up ra, 2 6 1 G a

. A p p

. at 5 8 3 (5 ). Ad d i t i o nal l y

, al t h o u g h t h e

Si m p s on s cl ai m t h at th ei r s u cces s fu l b reach o f co n t ract cl ai m an d t hei r u n s u cces s fu l

9 It ap p ears t h at t h e t ri al co u rt award e d a p p ro x i m at el y al l th e at t o rn ey fees

req u es t ed

.

30n eg li g en t co n s t ru ct i o n cl ai m were t o o s i m i l ar t o al l o w fo r t h e s ep arat io n o f t h e h o u rs

s p en t o n each cl ai m

, t h e t ri al co u rt wo ul d al s o h av e b een u n ab l e t o d i s c ern t h e

n u m b e r o f h o u rs al l ocat ed t o d efen d i n g t he s ep arat e co u nt ercl ai m s fi l ed b y Bi r c h

Pro p ert i es an d Hu sfel d

. See Emer s on v. B r o o kmer e Ho m eo wn er s As s n

., In c.

, 3 1 1 Ga.

Ap p

. 3 7 1

, 3 7 2 (7 1 5 SE2 d 7 7 5) (2 0 1 1 ) (u n d er OCGA § 1 3-6 -1 1

, p l ai n t i ff can n ot

reco v er ex p en s es o f d efen di n g ag ai n s t a co u n t ercl ai m ); P a u l v. Des ti t o

, 2 5 0 Ga. Ap p.

6 3 1

, 6 4 2 (9 ) (5 5 0 SE2 d 7 3 9 ) (2 0 0 1 ) (p l ai n t i ff co u ld n o t r e c o v e r at t o rn ey fees in

d efen d in g ag ai n s t co u n tercl ai m al leg i n g t h at h e o wed m o n ey t o t h e d e f en d an t ).

Th erefo re, we rev ers e t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s award o f at t o rn ey fees t o t h e Si m p s o n s an d

rem an d to t h e t ri al co u rt fo r an ev i d en t i ary h eari n g t o al l o w t h e Si m p s on s t o es t ab l i s h

t h e am o u n t o f at t o rn ey fees t h at was at t ri b ut ab l e t o th ei r p rev ai l i ng cl ai m s

. Ter r el l v.

Pi p p ar t

, 3 1 4 Ga. Ap p

. 4 83

, 4 8 5 (2 ) (7 24 SE2 d 8 02 ) (2 0 1 2 ); Pr emi er Ca b in et s

, In c.

,

s u p ra, 2 6 1 Ga. A p p. at 5 83 (5 ); Da vi d C. Jo el

, At t o r n ey a t La w, P.C. v. Ch a st a i n

, 2 5 4

Ga. Ap p . 5 9 2 , 5 9 7 (4 ) (5 6 2 SE2 d 7 4 6 ) (2 0 0 2 ).

Ca s e No . A2 2

A0 0 6 4

7

. In t h ei r cro s s -ap p eal

, t h e Si m p s on s arg ue t h at th e t ri al co u rt erred i n n ot

i m p o s i n g an y l i ab i li t y ag ai n s t H u s f e l d i n h i s i nd i v i d u al cap aci t y o n t h ei r n eg l i g en t

co n st ru ct i o n cl ai m b ecau s e H u s f e l d w as t h e s o l e em

p l o y ee of Bi rch Pro p ert i es an d

31was res p o n s i b l e fo r ap p ro v i ng t h e wo rk d o n e b y Bi rch Pro p ert i es ’ co n t ract o rs

. W e

co n cl u d e t hat s u ffi ci en t ev i d en ce s u p p ort ed t h e tri al co u rt ’ s ju d g m en t i n Hu s fel d ’ s

fav o r o n t h i s cl ai m

.

“ [A] pers o n wh o i s a m e m b er, m an ag er, ag en t

, o r em p l o y ee o f a l i m i t ed

l i ab i l i t y co m

p an y i s n o t l iab l e, fo r a d eb t

, o b l i gat i on

, o r l iab i li t y o f th e l i m i t ed

l i ab i l i t y co m p an y

, . . . wh et h er ari si n g i n co n t ract

, t o rt

, o r ot h erwi s e.” (Pu n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed .) Pr i ma r

y In ves t men t

s

, LLC v. W

ee Ten d er Ca r e III, In c.

, 3 2 3 Ga. Ap p

. 1 9 6,

1 9 9 (1 ) (7 4 6 SE2 d 8 2 3 ) (2 0 1 3 ) (q u o t i n g OCGA § 14 -1 1 -3 0 3 (a)). Th i s p ri n ci p l e

ap p li es reg ard l es s o f wh et her an i n d i v i d ual i s t h e s o le o p erat o r o f th e l i m i t ed l i ab i l i t y

co m p an y

. Cf. Ch ri s t o

p h er v. S i n

ya r d

, 3 1 3 Ga. Ap p

. 8 6 6

, 8 6 7 (1 ) (7 2 3 SE2 d 7 8 )

( 2 0 1 2 ) (“ [T] h e m ere o perat i o n o f [a] co rp o rat e b u s i n es s d o es n o t ren d er o n e

p ers o n al l y l i ab l e fo r co rp o rat e act s .”) (ci t at i on o m i tt ed ). Nev ert h el es s

, “ [a] n LLC

m em b er m ay be h el d i n di vi d u al l y l i ab l e i f h e o r s h e p ers o n al l y p a r t i c i p at es o r

co o perat es i n a t o rt co m

m i t ted by t h e LLC o r d i rect s i t t o b e d o ne.” M i l k v. To t a l Pa

y

& HR S o l s

., In c.

, 2 8 0 Ga. A pp

. 4 4 9, 4 54 (6 34 SE2 d 20 8 ) (2 00 6 ). A c c o r d i n g l y

, i f

Bi rch Pro p ert i es was n eg l ig en t i n c o n s t ru ct i n g t h e h o m e, Hu s fel d “ co u l d b e h el d

p ers o n al l y l i ab l e fo r t h e n eg l i gen t co n st ru ct i o n i f h e s p eci fi cal l y d i rect ed t h e m an n er

i n wh i ch t h e h o u se was co n s t ru c t e d o r p a rt i ci p at ed or co o p erat ed i n i t s n eg l i g en t

32co n st ru ct i o n .” Ba j a Pr o p er t i es

, LLC v. Ma t t er a

, 34 5 Ga. Ap p

. 1 0 1

, 1 0 4 (2 ) (8 1 2 SE2 d

3 5 8 ) (2 0 1 8 ).

Here, t h e t ri al co u rt was au t h o ri zed t o d et erm i n e t hat Hu s fel d n ei t h er d i rect ed

t h e m an ner i n wh i ch t h e h o m e was co n s t ru ct ed n o r p art ici p at ed o r co o perat ed i n i t s

n eg li g en t co n s t ru ct i o n

. Hu s fel d t es t i fi ed t h a t h e d o es n o t su p erv i s e t h e

s u b co n t ract o rs ; i n s t e a d

, h e recei v es i n fo rm at i o n fro m t h e h o m eo wn ers ab o u t t h ei r

d es i res fo r t he h o m e, co n v ey s t h i s in fo rm at i o n t o t he s u b c o n t r act o rs

, an d p ay s t h e

s u b co n t ract o rs fo r t hei r w o rk

. A l t h o u g h Bi rch Pro pert i es pro v i des a warran t y fo r t h e

h o m e, Hu s fel d rel i es on th e s u b co n t ract o rs t o e n s u r e t h at t h e wo rk i s co m p l et ed

.

Hu s fel d “ l o o k s at [t h e] wo rk to s ee i f it ’ s been d o n e ri g h t,” bu t h e wo u l d n ot act u al l y

k n o w wh et h er a jo b i s co m p l et ed p ro p erl y b ecau se h e h as n o s p eci al i zed k n o wl ed g e

i n areas s u ch as p lu m

b i n g an d el ect ri cal wo rk

. He ex p l ai n ed t h a t h e i s n o t req u i red

t o b e o n t h e jo b si t e, an d o n t he o ccas io n s t h at h e d i d v i s i t t h e jo b s i t e, h e m erel y

l o ck ed an d u nl o ck ed t h e h o m e.

A l t h o u g h t h e Si m

p s o n s arg u e t hat Hu s fel d h ad a d u ty t o su p erv i s e t h e

s u b co n t ract o rs ’ wo rk

, t h ey ci te t o n o co m m o n law or st at u t o ry au t h o ri ty fo r t h i s

p ro p os i t i on

. An d wh i l e we are m i n d fu l t h at a g en eral co n t ract or can p o t en t ial l y i n cu r

p ers o n al l i ab i l i t y w h ere h e affi rm at i v el y u n d er t akes t o s u p erv is e co n s tru ct io n wo rk

33an d d oes s o n e g l i g e n t l y

, t h ere was n o ev i d en ce t hat Hu s fel d en g ag ed o r s o u g h t to

en g ag e i n an y s u p erv i s i o n

. Co m p are S ch of i el d In ter i o r Co n t r a ct or

s

, In c. v. S t a n d

ar d

Bl d g

. Co

. , In c.

, 2 9 3 Ga. Ap p

. 8 1 2

, 8 1 5 (6 6 8 SE2 d 31 6 ) (2 0 08 ) (p ro ject m an ag er h ad

a d ut y t o “ p erfo rm t he su p e r v i s i o n ” o f t he co ns t ru ct i o n wo rk sk i l l fu l l y

, carefu l l y

,

d i l i g en t l y

, an d i n a wo rk m an l i ke m an n er); Ho wel l v. Ayer s

, 1 29 Ga. A p p

. 8 9 9

, 9 0 0

(4 ) (2 02 SE2 d 1 8 9) (1 9 73 ) (ev i d en ce was s u ffi ci en t t o s h o w t h e co n t ract o r’ s

n eg li g en ce “ i n u n dert ak i n g t o s u p erv i s e” t h e co n s t ru ct i o n wo rk ).

Gi v en Hu s fel d ’ s t es ti m o n y

, t h e t ri al co u rt was al l ow e d to c o nc lude tha t Hu s fel d

was n o t p ers o nal l y l i ab l e fo r th e n eg l i g en t co n s t ru ct i o n

. Co m p are Fi el ds Br o s

. Gen

.

Co n t ra ct o r

s v. Ru eck

s t i e s

, 2 88 Ga. Ap p

. 6 7 4, 6 7 7 -6 7 8 (2 ) (6 5 5 SE2 d 2 8 2 ) (2 0 0 7 )

(t ri al co u rt p ro p erl y fo un d g en eral co n t ract o r p ers o n al l y l i ab l e w h ere h e was t h e l ead

fram er fo r t h e h o m e an d h e i n s p ect ed o t h ers ’ wo rk ); Ch er r y v. W a r d , 2 0 4 Ga. Ap p.

8 3 3

, 8 3 4 (1 ) (a) ( 4 2 0 S E 2 d 7 6 3 ) (1 9 9 2 ) (g en eral co n t ract o r w as p ers o nal l y l i ab l e

wh ere h e “ ack n o wl ed g ed t h at h e was p ers o n al l y i n vo l v ed i n t h e co n s t ru ct i o n o f [t h e]

ap p el l ee’ s h o m e o n a d ai l y b as i s

, p ers on al l y s u p erv i s ed t he co n s t ru ct i o n ‘ fro m s t art

t o fi n i s h ,’ an d wo rk ed as t h e ‘ p ro j ect fo rem an ’ fo r t h e jo b ”). Acco rd i n g l y

, t h e t ri al

co u rt was en t i tl ed t o fi nd i n Hu s fel d ’ s fav o r o n t h e n eg l i g en t co n s t ru ct i o n cl ai m

.

34Ju d

g men t a ff i r m ed i n Ca s e No

. A2 2

A0064. J udgm e n t affirm e d in p a r t

, r ever s ed

i n p a r t a n d ca s e r ema n d

ed wi t h d i r ect i o n in Ca s e No

. A2 2 A0 0 63

. Ri ckma n

, C. J., a n d

Pi p ki n , J., co ncu r

.

35