Blackwell v. Georgia Real Estate Com'n, A92A0034
| Decision Date | 03 June 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. A92A0034,A92A0034 |
| Citation | 421 S.E.2d 716,205 Ga.App. 233 |
| Parties | BLACKWELL v. GEORGIA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Gordon G. Blackwell, pro se.
Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Mark H. Cohen, Beverly B. Martin, Sr. Asst. Attys. Gen., Robert M. Siegel, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appellant appeals from the trial court's order granting appellee's motion to dismiss.
Appellant, a former licensed real estate broker in Georgia, had his license revoked by appellee because of his racially discriminatory behavior after an administrative hearing. Acting pro se, appellant appealed appellee's decision to the superior court, which affirmed appellee's final order revoking the license and denied appellant's request for a stay of the order. Appellant then attempted to appeal the superior court's ruling directly to this court; however, the superior court dismissed the appeal for failure to comply with the procedures for discretionary appeals pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-35. The dismissal was never pursued by appellant. Subsequently, appellant filed a separate lawsuit in superior court alleging that appellee's decision to revoke his license was in error and seeking a stay of appellee's final order as well as $3,000,000 in damages against appellee. Appellee filed a motion to dismiss which was granted by the superior court. It is from this order that appellant now appeals.
In his sole enumeration of error, appellant contests appellee's authority to revoke his real estate license and asserts that appellee's administrative decision was in error. Appellant has previously litigated these claims and cannot now re-litigate his assertion of error by appellee and his request for a stay of appellee's decision. " Stiltjes v. Ridco Exterminating Co., 197 Ga.App. 852, 399 S.E.2d 708 (1990). For res judicata to bar re-litigation, the merits must have been adjudicated in the first action, the parties must be identical in the two actions and the cause of action in the two actions must be the same. Id. We have previously held that questions of fact once ruled upon by an administrative body, such as the State Board of Workers' Compensation, are thereafter precluded from re-litigation by the doctrines of res judicata and estoppel by judgment. See Garrett v. K-Mart Corp., 197 Ga.App. 374, 398 S.E.2d 302 (1990). In the instant case, appellee ruled upon the merits of the exact issues raised herein in an administrative hearing between the same parties to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Malloy v. State
...113, 552 S.E.2d 880 (2001). See Epps Air Svc. v. Lampkin, 229 Ga. 792, 795(2), 194 S.E.2d 437 (1972); Blackwell v. Ga. Real Estate Comm., 205 Ga.App. 233, 234, 421 S.E.2d 716 (1992). Specifically, administrative decisions may have a collateral estoppel effect in a subsequent judicial procee......
-
Swain v. State
...4 (1986) (relying on Wyatt). 16. Epps Air Svc. v. Lampkin, 229 Ga. 792, 795(2), 194 S.E.2d 437 (1972); Blackwell v. Ga. Real Estate Comm., 205 Ga.App. 233, 234, 421 S.E.2d 716 (1992); Hunter v. City of Warner Robins, 842 F.Supp. 1460, 1465 17. See Dickerson v. Dickerson, 247 Ga.App. 812, 81......
-
Hunter v. City of Warner Robins, Ga.
...preclusive effect to agency factfinding under the traditional guidelines of collateral estoppel. See Blackwell v. Georgia Real Estate Commission, 205 Ga.App. 233, 421 S.E.2d 716 (1992); Hunter v. State, 191 Ga.App. 769, 382 S.E.2d 679 In Georgia, the prerequisites to the application of the ......
-
Lilly v. Heard
...rules as some other boards to whose rulings our courts have accorded preclusive effect. See, e.g., Blackwell v. Ga. Real Estate Comm., 205 Ga.App. 233, 234, 421 S.E.2d 716 (1992) (holding that a decision by the Georgia Real Estate Commission was entitled to preclusive effect); OCGA § 43–40–......
-
Travers v. Jones: Is "fact Preclusion" a Death Knell for Section 1983 Employment Claims Against Local Governments by Civil Service Employees?
...his discharge case.195 The plaintiff also tried to disqualify the 186. Id. at 1465. 187. Id. (citing Blackwell v. Ga. Real Estate Comm'n, 421 S.E.2d 716 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992); Hunter v. State, 382 S.E.2d 679 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989) (holding that Georgia applied preclusion to agency factfinding)).......