Jennings v. Smith
| Decision Date | 30 April 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. A97A0848,A97A0848 |
| Citation | 226 Ga.App. 765,487 S.E.2d 362 |
| Parties | , 97 FCDR 1823 JENNINGS v. SMITH. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Charles F. Peebles for appellant.
Mark A. Smith, III, Atlanta, for appellee.
Maneola S. Jennings appeals the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Mark A. Smith, Jr., on her claims for negligent construction and fraudulent concealment. For the reasons discussed below, we reverse the trial court's ruling.
In February 1991, Jennings agreed to purchase a house built by Roswell Properties, Inc. Smith was vice-president and 50 percent shareholder of Roswell Properties, and executed the purchase and sale contract on behalf of the corporation.
After closing on the sale of the house, Jennings claims she discovered several structural defects, including a cracking driveway, leaks, and soil erosion near a retaining wall. Jennings also claims that there was severe settlement of the house, cracks and shifting of the walls and floors, a defective deck, and other problems. Jennings asked Roswell Properties to repair many of these problems, and claims that the repairs were unsatisfactory. Jennings sued Roswell Properties and Smith, asserting claims of negligent construction and fraudulent concealment, and appeals the grant of summary judgment to Smith. 1
1. Jennings contends that material issues of fact remain as to whether Smith can be held personally liable on the basis that he took part in or supervised the corporation's negligent acts. "[A]n officer of a corporation who takes part in the commission of a tort by the corporation is personally liable therefor, and an officer of a corporation who takes no part in the commission of a tort committed by the corporation is not personally liable unless he specifically directed the particular act to be done or participated or cooperated therein." (Punctuation omitted.) Cherry v. Ward, 204 Ga.App. 833, 834(1)(a), 420 S.E.2d 763 (1992); see also Brown v. Rentz, 212 Ga.App. 275, 276, 441 S.E.2d 876 (1994).
Jennings' claim for negligent construction is based in part upon her contention that Roswell Properties buried construction trash and debris under the property, causing damage to the house and driveway when the soil settled. John Collins, a neighbor, submitted an affidavit stating that he had seen workers, in Smith's presence, dumping trash and construction debris from other construction sites under the area where Jennings' driveway, garage, front porch, and foundations were built. He further stated that, after the debris was covered with dirt, he saw workers construct the driveway, garage, and front portion of the residence over the areas where the debris had been buried. He stated that it appeared Smith was directing the placement of the fill and dirt over the debris.
At his deposition, Smith's attorney challenged many of the details of Collins' affidavit. Collins admitted that the foundation of the house and garage had already been laid when he saw the debris being deposited. However, he reaffirmed the remainder of his affidavit. Although Smith's attorney attempted to discredit Collins by showing that he could not have observed Smith at the property, for purposes of summary judgment all facts must be construed and all reasonable inferences drawn in favor of Jennings.
There was also evidence that Smith supervised and directed repairs to the property. Catherine Hohlstein, a real estate agent, testified that she had seen Smith personally instructing a worker in how to repair a leak in the basement and a crack in the garage floor. Jennings testified that she had seen Smith personally supervising workers repairing leaks in the garage walls, repairing cracks and correcting settlement problems in the driveway, constructing the rear deck, and filling sinkholes in the property.
Given this evidence, if a jury found the corporation negligent in constructing or repairing the house, it could also find Smith personally liable for such negligence because he specifically...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chemtall, Inc. v. Citi-Chem, Inc.
...407, 411(1)(a) (203 S.E.2d 597) (1973). Weir v. McGill, 203 Ga.App. 431, 432, 417 S.E.2d 57 (1992); accord Jennings v. Smith, 226 Ga.App. 765, 766, 487 S.E.2d 362 (1997). As an example, the corporate veil can be pierced where a corporate officer participates with his corporation in wrongful......
-
Woodstone Townhouses, LLC v. S. Fiber Worx, LLC
...liable unless he specifically directed the particular act to be done or participated or cooperated therein. Jennings v. Smith , 226 Ga. App. 765, 766 (1), 487 S.E.2d 362 (1997) (citations and punctuation omitted); accord Almond v. McCranie , 283 Ga. App. 887, 889 (2), 643 S.E.2d 535 (2007).......
-
Garcia v. Chrysler Grp. LLC
...of their argument that Chrysler had a duty to disclose the alleged TIPM defect under Georgia law, plaintiffs cite Jennings v. Smith, 226 Ga.App. 765, 487 S.E.2d 362 (1997), and Ben Farmer Realty Co. v. Woodard, 212 Ga.App. 74, 441 S.E.2d 421 (1994). However, Jennings and Ben Farmer Realty o......
-
Uwork.com, Inc. v. Paragon Technologies, Inc.
...directed the particular act to be done,” he can be held personally liable. (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Jennings v. Smith, 226 Ga.App. 765, 766(1), 487 S.E.2d 362 (1997). Here, there was evidence that Tsao personally directed other Covendis employees to enter the VMS on April 28 and ......