Andrews v. Blue Ridge NH Assocs., LLC

• Decision Date: 04 November 2019
• Docket Number: A19A1916
• Citation: 836 S.E.2d 197,353 Ga.App. 75
• Parties: ANDREWS v. BLUE RIDGE NH ASSOCIATES, LLC et al.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

353 Ga.App. 75

836 S.E.2d 197

ANDREWS

v.BLUE RIDGE NH ASSOCIATES, LLC et al.

A19A1916

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

November 4, 2019

Robert Neal Katz, Briant Glen Mildenhall, Atlanta, for Appellant.

Thomas Andrew Graham, Howard Watson Reese III, Jacob Howell Raehn, Atlanta, Jonathan Bledsoe, Brittany Marie Dant, Dalton, for Appellee.

Barnes, Presiding Judge.

Donna Andrews, as the Administrator of the Estate of Johnny Lee Fleak (the "decedent"), brought this negligence, premises liability, and wrongful death action against Chatsworth HCC, LLC d/b/a Chatsworth Health Care Center, Inc. ("Chatsworth HC"), Chatsworth Health Care Limited Partnership ("Chatsworth LP"), Blue Ridge Health Care, LLC ("Blue Ridge HC"), Blue Ridge NH Associates, LLC ("Blue Ridge Associates"),¹ HLTC, Inc., and several John Doe defendants. The trial court subsequently entered an order granting three motions filed by the defendants: Chatsworth LP and Blue Ridge HC’s motion to dismiss them as improper parties; the Chatsworth-Blue Ridge Defendants’ motion to dismiss for improper venue, or alternatively, to transfer based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens; and HLTC’s motion to transfer based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens. Andrews now appeals these rulings. For the reasons discussed below, we vacate in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

The record reflects that the decedent received care and treatment at two nursing home facilities pertinent to this appeal, Chatsworth Health Care Center in Murray County and Regency Park Health and Rehabilitation in Whitfield County. According to the plaintiff’s complaint, the decedent was dependent on staff and mechanical lifts for transfers on and off of his bed because he was paralyzed in his left extremities. The complaint alleged that on July 24, 2015, the nursing staff at Chatsworth Health Care Center improperly operated a mechanical lift and dropped the decedent while returning him to bed, causing him to suffer a fractured left leg and hip. The complaint further alleged that the decedent later was admitted to Regency Park Health and Rehabilitation, but the staff failed to monitor him for pressure sores, and he developed a decubitus ulcer in the left hip and buttocks area.

Following the decedent’s death from complications alleged to have arisen from his injuries, Andrews, as the administrator of his estate, brought the present lawsuit on March 14, 2018, in the State Court of DeKalb County. The complaint alleged that the Chatsworth-Blue Ridge Defendants owned, operated, and/or managed Chatsworth Health Care Center and that HLTC managed Regency Park Health and Rehabilitation. The complaint also alleged that the defendants were responsible for the negligent acts of their agents and employees at those nursing home facilities, and that the Chatsworth-Blue Ridge Defendants failed to keep the premises safe for residents and invitees of Chatsworth Health Care Center such as the decedent. The complaint asserted multiple claims against the defendants, including claims for professional and ordinary negligence, premises liability, violations of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, negligent hiring, training, and supervision, and wrongful death.

Venue in DeKalb County was founded upon the residence of Blue Ridge HC and Blue Ridge Associates based on the location of the registered office that they maintained in that county. Both companies were served at the registered office.

The defendants filed their respective answers, denying liability.² The defendants also filed several motions, including: Chatsworth LP and Blue Ridge HC’s Motion to Dismiss Improper Parties; the Chatsworth-Blue Ridge Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue, or Alternatively To Transfer Forum Non Conveniens; and HLTC’s Motion for Forum Non Conveniens Transfer.³ Additionally, HLTC thereafter filed a motion seeking to stay all discovery.

Following a hearing in which the parties presented oral argument and the trial court stayed all further discovery, the trial court entered an order granting the defendants’ motions in March 2019 (the "March 2019 Order").⁴ First, the trial court ruled that Chatsworth LP and Blue Ridge HC should be dismissed as improper parties (a) based on affidavits and other documents that those two companies filed reflecting that they never owned, operated, or managed either of the nursing home facilities where the decedent allegedly was injured and (b) based on an alleged admission made by plaintiff’s counsel at the hearing that the two companies would be dismissed from the case. Second, the trial court ruled that venue in DeKalb County could not be predicated on the residency of Blue Ridge Associates because that company’s registered office changed from DeKalb County to Dawson County as of February 27, 2018, before Andrews filed her complaint. Third, the trial court ruled that venue should be transferred from the State Court of DeKalb County to the Superior Court of Whitfield County based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens.

1. We first address the threshold jurisdictional question of whether Andrews was required to follow this Court’s interlocutory appeal procedures to obtain appellate review.⁵ We answer that question in the negative because the trial court’s March 2019 Order was directly appealable under OCGA § 9-11-56 (h).

OCGA § 5-6-34 (b) governs the method for pursuing appeals of interlocutory orders. See Grogan v. City of Dawsonville , 305 Ga. 79, 82 (2), 823 S.E.2d 763 (2019). Under that statutory subsection, a party seeking to appeal must first obtain a certificate of review from the trial court and then must obtain permission from the appellate court to pursue the appeal. See id. "Once the trial court and then an appellate court grant a party permission to appeal an interlocutory order, the party must file a notice of appeal within a specified period to confer jurisdiction on the appellate court." Id. "The failure to follow the interlocutory appeal requirements, when applicable, generally deprives this Court of jurisdiction." Eidson v. Croutch , 337 Ga. App. 542, 543, 788 S.E.2d 129 (2016).

In its March 2019 Order, the trial court transferred venue of the case to a different county, and a trial court’s ruling to transfer venue is considered interlocutory in nature and is subject to the procedures governing interlocutory appeals. Mauer v. Parker Fibernet , 306 Ga. App. 160, 161, 701 S.E.2d 599 (2010). Consequently, Andrews was required to follow the interlocutory appeal procedures unless there was another statutory basis for filing a direct appeal.

Andrews argues that a direct appeal of the March 2019 Order was authorized based on OCGA § 9-11-56 (h),⁶ which allows for the direct appeal of a trial court’s partial grant of summary judgment. Andrews notes that in the March 2019 Order, in addition to transferring venue, the trial court granted Chatsworth LP and Blue Ridge HC’s Motion to Dismiss Improper Parties, and she contends that the motion was in substance and effect a motion for summary judgment and that the trial court’s ruling on the motion should be viewed as the grant of summary judgment to those two parties. Consequently, because the grant of summary judgment "on any issue or as to any party" is directly appealable under OCGA § 9-11-56 (h), Andrews maintains that she had the right to directly appeal the trial court’s grant of the Motion to Dismiss Improper Parties. And, because "when a direct appeal is taken, any other judgments, rulings or orders rendered in the case and which may affect the proceedings below may be raised on appeal and reviewed and determined by the appellate court,"⁷ Andrews argues that it also was within her right to appeal the trial court’s venue-related rulings contained in the March 2019 Order. We agree with Andrews.

In their brief filed in support of their Motion to Dismiss Improper Parties filed in the court below, Chatsworth LP and Blue Ridge HC noted that the complaint alleged that they managed Chatsworth Health Care Center during the time that the decedent suffered his injuries, but they asserted that those "allegations [were] factually inaccurate," that neither company "has ever operated, controlled, or otherwise managed[ ] Chatsworth Health Care Center," and that they "lack[ed] ... involvement with the allegations at issue." Chatsworth LP asserted that it was a land holding company, and both companies contended that the operating agreement for Chatsworth Health Care Center reflected that they were not involved in the ownership, operation, or management of that nursing home facility. In support of their assertions, Chatsworth LP and Blue Ridge HC each submitted an affidavit from Dana Karschner, who was the general partner and general counsel for Chatsworth LP and the managing member and general counsel for Blue Ridge HC. Karschner averred that during the time period in question, Chatsworth LP did not operate a skilled nursing home facility in Murray County, did not employ anyone at such a facility, and "was not in charge of daily maintenance, repairs, or any other aspect evidencing control or operation of [such] a ... facility." Karschner similarly averred that during the pertinent time period, Blue Ridge HC did not own, operate, or control a skilled nursing home facility in Murray County, did not employ anyone there, and was not in charge of maintenance or repairs. Karschner further averred that Blue Ridge HC was formed as a company after the events at issue in this case and was administratively dissolved as a business entity in 2017, without ever having transacted any business in Georgia. Records purportedly from the Corporate Division of the Secretary of State of Georgia for Blue Ridge HC also were included as exhibits to the Motion to Dismiss Improper Parties. Based on the affidavits and exhibits, Chatsworth LP and Blue Ridge HC requested that the trial court dismiss them from the case with prejudice.

...