Spalding Ford Lincoln-Mercury, Inc. v. Turner Broadcasting Systems, Inc.

• Decision Date: 15 January 1992
• Docket Number: INC,LINCOLN-MERCUR,No. A91A1629,A91A1629
• Citation: 202 Ga.App. 505,415 S.E.2d 26
• Parties: SPALDING FORDv. TURNER BROADCASTING SYSTEMS, INC.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 26

415 S.E.2d 26

202 Ga.App. 505

SPALDING FORD LINCOLN-MERCURY, INC. v. TURNER BROADCASTING SYSTEMS, INC.

No. A91A1629.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Jan. 15, 1992.

Newton & Howell, John T. Newton, Jr., Griffin, for appellant.

Schreeder, Wheeler & Flint, J. Christopher Desmond, Lawrence S. Burnat, Atlanta, for appellee.

POPE, Judge.

In February of 1988, Rich/Love Advertising Agency, Inc. ("Rich") acting on behalf of appellant/defendant Spalding Ford Lincoln-Mercury, Inc. ("Ford") made arrangements for certain advertising to run during the months of February and March, 1988, on television station WTBS, which is owned by appellee/plaintiff Turner Broadcasting Systems, Inc. ("WTBS"). On February 8, 1988, Rich signed a credit application and media agreement with WTBS on behalf of Ford. It is undisputed that agreement is the only written contract between the parties to this dispute. The contract provided that the advertising would start on the day the contract was signed and that the total contract amount would be $4,000. The pertinent terms and conditions of the contract are set forth below:

"All advertising placed with [WTBS] by the undersigned advertising agency and advertiser shall be governed by the following terms and conditions.

"In consideration for [WTBS] providing television advertising, production services or related services in the future, the advertiser and advertising agency acknowledge and assume full responsibility, jointly and severally, for payment of all advertising and related expenses incurred, ordered and provided on behalf of the advertiser by [WTBS]. All such television advertising and related services provided by [WTBS] shall be due and payable within thirty (30) days from the date of invoice. Interest shall be added to all amounts thirty (30) days or more past due at the rate of one and one-half percent (1-1 1/2%) per month, calculated from the date of invoice. Should timely payments not be made, advertiser and advertising agency agree to pay all costs of collection including attorney's fees of fifteen percent (15%) and court costs if collected by law or through any attorney at law.

. . . . .

"This agreement and the terms and conditions outlined herein, shall govern and control all future services which may be provided by [WTBS], from time to time, for the undersigned advertising agency and advertiser.

"If the agreement is signed by the advertising agency alone, then advertising agency shall be deemed to have executed this agreement both as principal and as authorized agent for any and all advertisers on whose behalf advertising agency may, from time to time, request services be performed by [WTBS]."

WTBS billed Rich for the February and March advertising. Rich in turn billed Ford, who paid Rich. Rich then forwarded payment for the advertising to WTBS.

Approximately six months after the first block of advertising for Ford ran on WTBS, Rich approached WTBS about a second block of advertising for Ford to run from October 1988 through March 1989. At Ford's request the block of advertising was reduced to run only through January 1989. WTBS billed Rich on a monthly basis for the advertising. Rich then billed Ford for all advertising it had arranged for Ford, including WTBS, on a monthly basis. It is undisputed that Ford timely paid Rich for all advertising. Rich, however, failed to forward Ford's payments to WTBS.

WTBS sued both Ford and Rich for $21,675, the amount due for the advertising that ran from October 1988 through January 1989. Ford answered and filed a crossclaim for indemnity against Rich. Rich failed to answer the suit and a default judgment was rendered for WTBS against Rich. A jury trial was held on WTBS's claims against Ford. A jury found for WTBS in the principal amount of $21,675, plus interest and attorney fees. Ford filed a motion for j.n.o.v. or in the alternative, motion for new trial, which the trial court denied. Ford appeals from the judgment and the trial court's denial of its motion for j.n.o.v.

1. Ford first contends that the evidence does not support the jury's finding that WTBS relied on the credit of Ford. Essentially, Ford argues that WTBS relied solely on the credit of Rich, making...