Coastal Bank v. Rawlins
Decision Date | 11 April 2022 |
Docket Number | A22A0286 |
Citation | 871 S.E.2d 894 |
Parties | The COASTAL BANK v. RAWLINS et al. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Glen M. Darbyshire, Andrew Harrison Dekle, Savannah, for Appellant.
Brent J. Savage, Brent Jamieson Savage Jr., Savannah, for Appellee.
Phipps, Senior Appellate Judge.
This is the third time this civil case has come before us. In Coastal Bank v. Rawlins , 335 Ga. App. XXX (Case No. A15A1951) (Feb. 12, 2016) (unpublished) ("Rawlins I "), we reversed the trial court's order denying summary judgment to defendant The Coastal Bank ("Coastal").1 Coastal thereafter filed a motion for attorney fees and litigation expenses against plaintiffs Larry Rawlins, Jr., and Laura Lopez (the "Rawlinses"), under Georgia's offer of settlement statute, OCGA § 9-11-68, which the trial court denied. Coastal again appealed, and, in Coastal Bank v. Rawlins , 347 Ga. App. 847, 851 (1), 821 S.E.2d 89 (2018) (" Rawlins II "), we vacated the trial court's order and remanded for the court to apply the test enunciated in Richardson v. Locklyn , 339 Ga. App. 457, 460-461, 793 S.E.2d 640 (2016), for determining whether an offer of settlement was made in good faith. On remand, the trial court again denied Coastal's motion for OCGA § 9-11-68 attorney fees. Coastal again appeals, arguing that the trial court erred by basing its ruling on improper factors and by failing to properly apply the relevant factors. For the reasons that follow, we discern no reversible error and affirm.
We set forth the underlying facts in our opinion in Rawlins II :
Rawlins II , 347 Ga. App. at 848-849, 821 S.E.2d 89. After a hearing, the trial court denied Coastal's request for attorney fees on the ground that its offer had not been made in good faith. Id. at 849-850, 821 S.E.2d 89.
On appeal, we vacated the trial court's order, concluding that the court had failed to fully comply with the test enunciated in Richardson , 339 Ga. App. at 460-461, 793 S.E.2d 640, for determining whether an offer of settlement was made in good faith. Rawlins II , 347 Ga. App. at 850-851 (1), 821 S.E.2d 89. In particular, we highlighted that, while the trial court identified several objective factors on which it based its decision, it abused its discretion by failing to consider and weigh those factors "against Coastal's subjective belief in the strength of its no-standing defense." Id. at 851 (1), 821 S.E.2d 89. As a result, we remanded the case for the trial court to conduct a hearing, "consider whether Coastal had a subjectively reasonable belief on which to base its settlement offer," and apply the Richardson test. Id. at 848, 851 (1), 821 S.E.2d 89.
On remand, following a hearing, the trial court concluded that Coastal did not have a subjectively reasonable basis for its offer and again denied Coastal's motion for OCGA § 9-11-68 attorney fees and expenses. This appeal followed.
As relevant here, the offer of settlement statute provides:
If a defendant makes an offer of settlement which is rejected by the plaintiff, the defendant shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees and expenses of litigation incurred by the defendant or on the defendant's behalf from the date of the rejection of the offer of settlement through the entry of judgment if the final judgment is one of no liability or the final judgment obtained by the plaintiff is less than 75 percent of such offer of settlement.
OCGA § 9-11-68 (b) (1). "The clear purpose of OCGA § 9-11-68 is to encourage litigants in tort cases to make and accept good faith settlement proposals in order to avoid unnecessary litigation, thereby advancing this State's strong public policy of encouraging negotiations and settlements." Rawlins II , 347 Ga. App. at 850 (1), 821 S.E.2d 89 (citation and punctuation omitted). Once a prevailing party establishes that OCGA § 9-11-68 applies, the trial court "shall order the payment of attorney's fees and expenses of litigation." OCGA § 9-11-68 (d) (1) ; Anglin v. Smith , 358 Ga. App. 38, 39, 853 S.E.2d 142 (2020). "Such an award may be disallowed only where the trial court finds the settlement offer was not made in good faith." Anglin , 358 Ga. App. at 40, 853 S.E.2d 142 ; see OCGA § 9-11-68 (d) (2). And if the trial court so finds, "it must set forth the basis for its determination in a written order." Richardson , 339 Ga. App. at 462, 793 S.E.2d 640 ; see OCGA § 9-11-68 (d) (2) ; accord Rawlins II , 347 Ga. App. at 850 (1), 821 S.E.2d 89 () (citation and punctuation omitted); see also Anglin , 358 Ga. App. at 41, 853 S.E.2d 142 ().
In three enumerations of error, Coastal challenges the trial court's finding that its settlement offer was not made in good faith. The reasonableness of an offer to settle under OCGA § 9-11-68 "is a factual determination, based on the trial court's assessment of the case, the parties, the lawyers, and all of the other factors that go into such a determination, which the trial court has gathered during the progress of the case." Great West Cas. Co. v. Bloomfield , 313 Ga. App. 180, 183 (2), 721 S.E.2d 173 (2011).
[D]etermining whether an offer was made in good faith rests on whether the offeror has a reasonable foundation on which to base the offer[,] and ... so long as the offeror has a basis in known or reasonably believed fact to conclude that the offer is justifiable, the good faith requirement has been satisfied. Whether the offeror has a reasonable basis to support the offer is determined solely by the offeror's own subjective motivations and beliefs.
Rawlins II , 347 Ga. App. at 850-851 (1), 821 S.E.2d 89 (citations and punctuation omitted). Relevant evidence on the question of good faith includes: (i) whether the offer bore a reasonable...
To continue reading
Request your trial