Clayton v. Edwards, No. A96A2165
| Court | United States Court of Appeals (Georgia) |
| Writing for the Court | BLACKBURN; BIRDSONG, P.J., and BEASLEY |
| Citation | 225 Ga.App. 141,483 S.E.2d 111 |
| Docket Number | No. A96A2165 |
| Decision Date | 27 January 1997 |
| Parties | , 97 FCDR 293 CLAYTON et al. v. EDWARDS. |
Page 111
v.
EDWARDS.
Reconsideration Denied March 5, 1997.
Certiorari Denied June 6, 1997.
Page 112
[225 Ga.App. 144] Casey, Gilson & Williams, Robert E. Casey, Jr., Sandra Gray, Matthew P. Stone, Thomas G. Hotard, Jr., Atlanta, for Appellants.
Sullivan, Hall, Booth & Smith, Robert L. Shannon, Jr., Alfonza Pearl, Atlanta, for Appellee.
[225 Ga.App. 141] BLACKBURN, Judge.
Clayton's Collection & Recovery Service, Inc. (CCR) and J. Kenneth Clayton appeal the denial of their motion for summary judgment on Richard Lee Edwards' claim for damages arising out of an automobile accident in which Edwards was injured.
Clayton is the owner and president of CCR, a corporation in the business of repossessing automobiles for lenders. In September 1992, CCR was hired by NationsBank to repossess a 1989 Chevrolet Astro van. CCR subcontracted the repossession assignment out to Robbie Johnson, an independent contractor who performed about half of CCR's repossessions at the time.
Johnson came to CCR's office to pick up a key to the van. At about the same time, Brian Hall, another individual CCR used from time to time to repossess vehicles, came to CCR's office to borrow Clayton's personal pickup truck to move some of Hall's personal belongings. Clayton loaned Hall his pickup truck, which contained a hoist that could be used for towing vehicles. Clayton did not hire Hall to repossess the Chevrolet Astro van and did not authorize Hall to use Clayton's truck to assist Johnson in the repossession.
The next morning, Clayton found the repossessed van and Clayton's pickup truck in CCR's parking lot. Clayton noticed that the truck had been damaged as if it had been in
Page 113
an accident. CCR paid Johnson his fee for repossessing the van.As it turns out, Hall had assisted Johnson in the repossession and was involved in an accident with Edwards while towing the van with Clayton's personal pickup truck. Clayton testified that he and CCR were unaware of any involvement by Hall in the repossession.
Edwards brought this action against Clayton and CCR, alleging that they were liable for Hall's negligent acts under theories of agency, respondeat superior and ratification. The trial court denied [225 Ga.App. 142] Clayton and CCR's motion for summary judgment, finding there were issues of fact as to whether they ratified Hall's actions. For the reasons discussed below, we reverse the trial court's denial of summary judgment as to Clayton and CCR.
This Court considers de novo the entire record before it on review of denial of a motion for summary judgment to determine if there were genuine issues of material fact which would preclude summary judgment or whether, instead, any such disputes were immaterial and the movant was entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. Cambridge Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Okonkwo, 218 Ga.App. 59, 61(1), 460 S.E.2d 302 (1995). If a defendant who will not bear the burden of proof at trial points to an absence of evidence to support the plaintiff's case, the plaintiff, to avoid summary judgment, may not rest on his pleadings, but must point to specific evidence giving rise to a triable issue. Lau's Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491, 405 S.E.2d 474 (1991).
1. Under Georgia law, an employer is generally not liable for the torts of an independent contractor. OCGA § 51-2-4. OCGA § 51-2-5(5), however, provides an exception to this general rule of nonliability where "the employer retains the right to direct or control the time and manner of executing the work or interferes and assumes control so as to create the relation of master and servant or so that an injury results which is traceable to his interference." Edwards argues that CCR exercised sufficient control over Hall to render it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Adler, Coleman Clearing Corp., Bankruptcy No. 95-08203 JLG. Adversary No. 97/8423A.
...635 ("The stealing rather than the speculation was the immediate cause of plaintiffs loss"). Claimants' reliance on Clayton v. Edwards, 225 Ga. App. 141, 483 S.E.2d 111 (1997), is similarly misplaced. That case was a tort action seeking damages for personal injury and has no bearing on whet......
-
Geeslin v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp., Civil Action No. 1:97cv186-D-A (N.D. Miss. 6/3/1998), Civil Action No. 1:97cv186-D-A.
...Loss Recovery, Inc., itself hired as an independent contractor — Hunter Recovery — to execute the repossession. See Clayton v. Edwards, 483 S.E.2d 111 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997). The Clayton case is inapposite from the situation at bar and involves the application of Georgia statutory law instead ......
-
Widner v. Brookins, Inc., No. A98A2051.
...on the part of Brookins. To ratify an act of an independent contractor, one must have knowledge of the act. Clayton v. Edwards, 225 Ga.App. 141, 143(2), 483 S.E.2d 111 (1997); Southern Mills v. Newton, 91 Ga.App. at 743(2)(b), 87 S.E.2d 109. Nothing in the record indicates that Brookins had......
-
Stewart v. Storch, No. A05A0267.
...and punctuation omitted.) Hyer v. C & S Nat. Bank, etc., 188 Ga.App. 452, 453(1), 373 S.E.2d 391 (1988). See also Clayton v. Edwards, 225 Ga.App. 141, 143(2), 483 S.E.2d 111 (1997) ("[w]here the principal ratifies the tort of the agent after its commission, the liability of the principal is......
-
In re Adler, Coleman Clearing Corp., Bankruptcy No. 95-08203 JLG. Adversary No. 97/8423A.
...635 ("The stealing rather than the speculation was the immediate cause of plaintiffs loss"). Claimants' reliance on Clayton v. Edwards, 225 Ga. App. 141, 483 S.E.2d 111 (1997), is similarly misplaced. That case was a tort action seeking damages for personal injury and has no bearing on whet......
-
Geeslin v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp., Civil Action No. 1:97cv186-D-A (N.D. Miss. 6/3/1998), Civil Action No. 1:97cv186-D-A.
...Loss Recovery, Inc., itself hired as an independent contractor — Hunter Recovery — to execute the repossession. See Clayton v. Edwards, 483 S.E.2d 111 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997). The Clayton case is inapposite from the situation at bar and involves the application of Georgia statutory law instead ......
-
Widner v. Brookins, Inc., No. A98A2051.
...on the part of Brookins. To ratify an act of an independent contractor, one must have knowledge of the act. Clayton v. Edwards, 225 Ga.App. 141, 143(2), 483 S.E.2d 111 (1997); Southern Mills v. Newton, 91 Ga.App. at 743(2)(b), 87 S.E.2d 109. Nothing in the record indicates that Brookins had......
-
Stewart v. Storch, No. A05A0267.
...and punctuation omitted.) Hyer v. C & S Nat. Bank, etc., 188 Ga.App. 452, 453(1), 373 S.E.2d 391 (1988). See also Clayton v. Edwards, 225 Ga.App. 141, 143(2), 483 S.E.2d 111 (1997) ("[w]here the principal ratifies the tort of the agent after its commission, the liability of the principal is......