Williford v. Brown
Decision Date | 09 May 2016 |
Docket Number | No. S16A0177.,S16A0177. |
Citation | 299 Ga. 15,785 S.E.2d 864 |
Parties | WILLIFORD v. BROWN. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Douglas Terry Kidd, Lavonia, for appellant.
Larry Lee Hicks, II, Milton Jeremy Daniel Moore, Moore & Hicks, P.C., Hartwell, for appellee.
The issue in this case is whether equitable relief is available in Georgia for an adult child of an elderly but competent parent to compel the parent's new spouse to give the child unimpeded access to the parent. The trial court held that such relief is not available, and we affirm that judgment.
1. On February 10, 2015, Tamara Williford filed a “Petition for Equitable Relief” against Mary Ann Brown in the Superior Court of Hart County. The petition alleged that Mrs. Brown's husband, Tommy S. Brown, is Ms. Williford's biological father; that Mr. Brown is in poor physical health and cannot leave home but is in good mental condition and can make decisions for himself; that Ms. Williford and Mr. Brown have a good relationship, used to talk on the telephone regularly, and until recently saw each other in person; and that Mr. Brown would like to see and speak to Ms. Williford but is prevented from doing so by Mrs. Brown. The petition requested an order requiring Mrs. Brown to allow Ms. Williford unimpeded personal access to Mr. Brown or appointing a guardian ad litem for Mr. Brown to ascertain his wishes. Mrs. Brown filed an answer denying that Ms. Williford is Mr. Brown's biological daughter, that he is in poor health, that he wishes to have contact with Ms. Williford, and that Mrs. Brown has interfered in any way with Ms. Williford's access to Mr. Brown.
Mrs. Brown also filed a motion to dismiss the petition for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See OCGA § 9–11–12(b)(6). Ms. Williford filed a response, acknowledging that no Georgia statute or case law gives an adult child a right of unimpeded access to a competent parent. Ms. Williford argued that the trial court nevertheless could exercise its equitable powers to craft a remedy allowing her to visit and communicate with Mr. Brown without interference from Mrs. Brown or to appoint a guardian ad litem to check on Mr. Brown's welfare and report his wishes to the court. On June 30, 2015, the trial court entered an order dismissing the petition. Ms. Williford filed a timely appeal to this Court, which was orally argued on February 8, 2016.
Durham v. Durham, 291 Ga. 231, 232, 728 S.E.2d 627 (2012) (quoting Beauchamp v. Knight, 261 Ga. 608, 609, 409 S.E.2d 208 (1991) ).
Most cases that come within this Court's traditional equity jurisdiction do so because the trial court balanced the equities in determining whether to grant or deny a well-established form of equitable relief, and the issue on appeal is the propriety of the relief that was granted or denied. Here, however, the trial court did not balance the equities in denying Ms. Williford the relief she requested. But neither was the equitable relief she sought merely ancillary to the resolution of an underlying issue of law that is now the subject of appeal. Indeed, Ms. Williford acknowledged that no Georgia statute or case law directly applies to her situation—an adult child claiming that she is being denied access to her elderly father by his new spouse—and she explicitly asked the trial court to exercise its powers as a court of equity to craft a remedy for her situation. See OCGA § 15–6–8(2) ().
Under the current appellate jurisdiction scheme, this Court, rather than the Court of Appeals, should decide in the first instance whether the novel equitable remedy that was sought in and denied by the trial court is available in Georgia—that is, the issue of “the legality ... of [the] equitable relief sought in the superior court.” Beauchamp, 261 Ga. at 609, 409 S.E.2d 208. See also Stark v. Hamilton, 149 Ga. 227, 228, 230, 99 S.E. 861 (1919) ( ). Accordingly, we will retain Ms. Williford's appeal.
We note, however, that because we decide below that the equitable remedy that Ms. Williford seeks is not available under Georgia law, a request in a future case for the same remedy on similar facts would be properly denied based on the legal precedent established in this case, and thus that decision if challenged on appeal would not invoke our equity jurisdiction under Beauchamp. Cf. Zepp v. Mayor & Council of Athens, 255 Ga. 449, 451, 339 S.E.2d 576 (1986) ( ). We also note, blissfully, that the need for Georgia's appellate courts and appellate litigants to engage in many intricate jurisdictional analyses of this sort will dissipate as of January 1, 2017. See footnote 1 above.
3. On the merits, Ms. Williford contends first that the trial court “erred when it ruled it cannot hear equitable petitions regarding domestic matters.” This contention mischaracterizes the trial court's ruling. The court's order dismissing Ms. Williford's petition did note that, “as a general matter, equity should not interfere in domestic matters,” but the court then went on to discuss and distinguish cases involving domestic matters where this Court held that an equitable remedy was available. For example, the trial court cited Stark, where this Court affirmed an equitable remedy granted to the father of a minor girl debauched by a man who had “induced her to abandon her parental abode and live with him in a state of adultery and fornication,” explaining:
“While courts of equity are reluctant to interpose in controversies growing out of merely personal or domestic relations, and will ordinarily leave the parties to pursue the remedies open to them in the courts of common law, still when ‘property rights or questions concerning property arise between husband and wife, parent and child, [or] guardian and ward,’ jurisdiction will be taken, in a proper case, in order that full and adequate relief may be granted to the injured party, [and this principle also applies where] ‘the complainant's status and personal rights were ... threatened or ... invaded by the action of the defendants....”
149 Ga. at 229, 99 S.E. 861 ((citations omitted)). See also Crawford v. Wilson, 139 Ga. 654, 654, 78 S.E. 30 (1913) ( ).
Thus, contrary to Ms. Williford's assertion, the trial court did not flatly rule that it could not hear her equitable petition because it involved a domestic matter. Instead, the court properly recognized equity's general reluctance to interfere in cases involving personal and domestic matters that do not also implicate the plaintiff's legal status or personal or property rights before explaining why, under the case law, an equitable remedy was not appropriate in Ms. Williford's case. Accordingly, Ms. Williford's first enumeration of error lacks merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Int'l Keystone Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Inc.
...of such jurisdiction.” Sanders v. State , 280 Ga. 780, 782, 631 S.E.2d 344 (2006) (citation omitted). See also Williford v. Brown , 299 Ga. 15, 15(2), 785 S.E.2d 864 (2016) ; Lay v. State , 289 Ga. 210, 211, 710 S.E.2d 141 (2011). There are two reasons to doubt our jurisdiction in this case......
-
Oni v. Oni
...to substitute its own notion of what is right in a particular case for a determination of what the law demands."); Williford v. Brown , 299 Ga. 15, 18 (3), 785 S.E.2d 864 (noting "equity's general reluctance to interfere in cases involving personal and domestic matters that do not also impl......
-
Oni v. Oni, A19A0711
...its own notion of what is right in a particular case for a determination of what the law demands."); Williford , 299 Ga. at 18 (3), 785 S.E.2d 864 (noting "equity's general reluctance to interfere in cases involving personal and domestic matters that do not also implicate the plaintiff's le......
-
Parrish v. St. Joseph's/Candler Health Sys.
... ... judgment. Thus, a consent decree is an enforceable ... judgment and can be accorded preclusive effect ... Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Gault , 280 ... Ga. 420, 423-424 (3) (627 S.E.2d 549) (2006) (citations and ... punctuation omitted). As ... must first ... identify some legally cognizable 'wrong' or ... 'injury' that needs to be remedied." ... Williford v. Brown , 299 Ga. 15, 18 (3) (785 S.E.2d ... 864) (2016) (punctuation omitted). As this Court has held, a ... trial court has "broad ... ...