Court Opinion

ID: 9925292
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-19 14:02:45.209052+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:46.515184
License: Public Domain

Court of Appeals
of the State of Georgia

                                        ATLANTA,____________________
                                                 January 19, 2024

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A24A0842. THASHA BOYD v. DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS, et al.

      Thasha Boyd sued Disabled American Veterans (“DAV”) and its employee,
Matthew Jahn, for defamation.1 The trial court initially dismissed the case, but this
Court reversed and remanded, finding that the allegations of the complaint were
sufficient to set forth a claim for defamation. Boyd v. Disabled American Veterans, 349
Ga. App. 351 (826 SE2d 181) (2019). After the close of discovery in the trial court,
DAV and Jahn moved for summary judgment. The trial court granted that motion,
and this Court affirmed the judgment in an unpublished opinion. Boyd v. Disabled
American Veterans, Case No. A20A1883 (January 12, 2021). Following remittitur,
Boyd filed three post-trial motions: (1) a motion to set aside the judgment under
OCGA § 9-11-60 (d) (2); (2) a motion to strike the defendants’ pleadings and the trial
court’s grant of summary judgment on the grounds that they violated Georgia’s
anti-SLAPP statute, OCGA § 9-11-11.1; and (3) a motion to recuse the trial judge. The
trial court denied all three motions in a single order,2 and Boyd then filed this direct
appeal.
      Both Boyd’s motion to set aside and motion to strike sought to challenge a final
judgment that this Court affirmed in a previous appeal. “It is axiomatic that the same

      1
      Boyd’s claims were based on sexual harassment complaints Jahn filed against
Boyd with her employer, the Department of Veterans Affairs.
      2
        In that same order, the trial court also denied the defendants’ motion for
attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14 (b).
issue cannot be relitigated ad infinitum. The same is true of appeals of the same issue
on the same grounds.” Jordan v. State, 253 Ga. App. 510, (2) (559 SE2d 528) (2002)
(punctuation omitted). See also PHF II Buckhead LLC v. Dinku, 315 Ga. App. 76,
78–79 (1) (726 SE2d 569) (2012) (a decision of this Court constitutes res judicata, and
bars subsequent appeals from the same judgment). Accordingly, our previous decision
affirming the grant of summary judgment bars Boyd from challenging that judgment
by way of a motion to set aside or motion to strike. See Jackson v. State, 273 Ga. 320,
320 (540 SE2d 612) (2001) (a party “is not entitled to another bite at the apple by way
of a second appeal”); Hook v. Bergen, 286 Ga. App. 258, 261 (1) (649 SE2d 313)
(2007).
      Furthermore, the fact that the case is no longer pending in the court below
moots the issues raised by Boyd’s motion to recuse the trial judge. See Richards v.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 325 Ga. App. 722, 726 (5) (b) (754 SE2d 770) (2014) (for
appellate purposes, a motion is moot if a ruling would have no practical effect on the
case); OCGA § 5-6-48 (b) (3) (an appeal may be dismissed when the questions
presented have become moot).
      Because the issues Boyd seeks to raise are barred by res judicata and/or are
moot, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.
                                        Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
                                          Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________
                                                                      01/19/2024
                                                   I certify that the above is a true extract from
                                        the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.
                                                   Witness my signature and the seal of said court
                                        hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

                                                                                          , Clerk.