Woodstone Townhouses, LLC v. S. Fiber Worx, LLC

• Decision Date: 23 February 2021
• Docket Number: A20A1884,A20A1857
• Parties: WOODSTONE TOWNHOUSES, LLC v. SOUTHERN FIBER WORX, LLC et al. Southern Fiber Worx, LLC. et al. v. Woodstone Townhouses, LLC.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

358 Ga.App. 516

855 S.E.2d 719

WOODSTONE TOWNHOUSES, LLC

v.SOUTHERN FIBER WORX, LLC et al.

Southern Fiber Worx, LLC. et al.

v.Woodstone Townhouses, LLC.

A20A1857

A20A1884

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

February 23, 2021

Kermit S. Dorough Jr., Albany, for Appellant in A20A1857.

Douglas Harris Dean, Cordele, for Appellee in A20A1857.

Douglas Harris Dean, Cordele, for Appellant in A20A1884.

Kermit S. Dorough Jr., Albany, for Appellant in A20A1884.

Phipps, Senior Appellate Judge.

These cases involve a trespass action filed by Woodstone Townhouses, LLC ("Woodstone"), which owns and operates an apartment complex known as Woodstone Townhouses, against Southern Fiber Worx, LLC, a telecommunications provider, and its owner, Gregory B. Turton. All parties moved for summary judgment, and the trial court granted in part and denied in part the motions. In Case No. A20A1857, Woodstone appeals the grant of partial summary judgment to Southern Fiber and Turton and the denial of both its motion for summary judgment and its motion to compel the production of financial records. In Case No. A20A1884, Southern Fiber and Turton appeal the trial court's denial of their motion for summary judgment.

For the reasons that follow, in Case No. A20A1857, we find that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether Southern Fiber and Turton were innocent trespassers or willfully trespassed on Woodstone's property and, accordingly, we affirm the trial court's denial of summary judgment to Woodstone on the trespass claim. However, we reverse the trial court's grant of summary judgment to Southern Fiber and Turton on Woodstone's claim for punitive damages, and, relatedly, we reverse the trial court's denial of Woodstone's motion to compel and remand for the trial court to revisit its ruling and determine whether Woodstone's motion to compel has merit given the ruling of this Court.

We also reverse the trial court's denial of Woodstone's motion for summary judgment on Southern Fiber's and Turton's defenses and counterclaims for fraud and promissory estoppel. We further find that the trial court erred in denying Woodstone's motion for summary judgment as to Southern Fiber's and Turton's defenses of failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, ratification, and laches, and Turton's defense of corporate shield.

We also affirm the trial court's denial of Woodstone's motion for summary judgment on Southern Fiber's and Turton's counterclaims for OCGA § 9-15-14 attorney fees for defending against Woodstone's suit, but we reverse the trial court's denial of summary judgment with respect to OCGA § 13-6-11 attorney fees and OCGA § 9-15-14 attorney fees for pursuing their counterclaims. Finally, we reverse the trial court's denial of summary judgment to Woodstone on Southern Fiber's and Turton's counterclaims for punitive damages.

In Case No. A20A1884, we affirm the trial court's denial of Southern Fiber and Turton's motion for summary judgment on Woodstone's claim for trespass.

The standards applied when determining a motion for summary judgment are well established:

When ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the opposing party should be given the benefit of all reasonable doubt, and the court should construe the evidence and all inferences and conclusions therefrom most favorably toward the party opposing the motion, and the court cannot resolve the facts or reconcile the issues. When we review the grant or denial of a motion for summary judgment, this court conducts a de novo review of the law and the evidence.

Lee v. Southern Telecom Co. , 303 Ga. App. 642, 642, 694 S.E.2d 125 (2010) (citations omitted).

So viewed, the record shows that Mark Crenshaw owns Woodstone and Woodstone Townhouses, which consists of 84 apartments. Tenants of the apartment complex purportedly contacted Southern Fiber about using its fiber internet services. In August 2017, Turton and employees of GBT, LLC, a company from which Southern Fiber leases employees to conduct its installation work, entered Woodstone's premises and remained there installing a conduit, which would later contain fiber optic cable, for approximately four hours.

Prior to beginning work, Southern Fiber purportedly called Georgia Locate 8-1-1, a company that notifies utility companies to mark their underground utility lines on a property. Thereafter, Turton observed painted lines grouped together in a 15-foot strip running away from the public road and believed there was a utility easement in that area. It is undisputed that Turton did not contact Crenshaw or anyone at Woodstone "regarding installing cable so that ... Southern Fiber could provide internet services to tenants of Woodstone[.]" In fact, prior to laying the cable, Turton spoke to Crenshaw's wife, who informed him that Crenshaw likely would not be interested in installing fiber internet on the property, and Turton attempted to contact Crenshaw a few times, but never spoke with Crenshaw about installing cable or digging on Woodstone's property. In fact, Turton admitted he did not have permission to go on the property. Although Southern Fiber later acknowledged in a letter that it understood there was no utility easement where Southern Fiber was working, there do appear to be questions of material fact regarding whether a blanket utility easement existed on the property and whether Southern Fiber had the right to utilize that easement.

On October 19, 2017, Turton and employees of GBT returned to Woodstone's property a second time to install meter boxes and holes to allow access to the conduit. During their work with a mini excavator, they broke a water line and water had to be turned off to the apartment complex. Turton informed someone at Woodstone that Southern Fiber had broken the water line while working on a utility easement, called to have the water to the apartment shut off, fixed the broken line, and then resumed working. When Crenshaw returned Turton's call, Turton explained that Southern Fiber had hit a water line while digging on the utility easement, to which Crenshaw responded that there was no utility easement on the property. Later that afternoon, Crenshaw met Turton where the water line was broken. Crenshaw informed Turton that Southern Fiber was not working on a utility easement, that Southern Fiber should have spoken with him before going on his property, and that Southern Fiber had no business being on his property. Turton believed that Crenshaw was merely concerned with being compensated in relation to any new internet service to the property because Crenshaw mentioned that only Southern Fiber would profit from laying cable, so Turton told Crenshaw he would provide him some options.

The next day, on October 20, 2017, Turton delivered to Crenshaw a letter setting forth four options. In the letter, Turton stated that he believed he was working on a utility easement, but understood from Crenshaw that there was no easement. Turton also acknowledged that he should have spoken with Crenshaw prior to performing any work. The letter set forth the following options "that could work for giving us permission to build service to these apartments":

Option 1: Let us service Crenshaw Jewelers with a 100 megs X 100 megs internet service for free for 2 years. That is a service that is normally $299 per month.

Option 2: Pay you a $1,000 one-time fee for the utility easement.

If one of the options above are not suitable, please let me know which of options 3 or 4 you would like for me to do.

Option 3: Leave the conduit and meter boxes in place and not provide service on your property. (This would give you a conduit you could use in the future if you ever need to.)

Option 4: Have us remove the conduit and meter boxes and return the property as it was before I drilled in the conduit.

The letter did not include any mention of a trespass claim or a settlement of any claim. After reading the letter, Crenshaw told Turton he would give him an answer the following Monday. Crenshaw, however, specifically informed Turton that it was going to take more than $1,000 for Southern Fiber to provide services to Woodstone's tenants, stating something like, "I can tell you a thousand dollars ain't going to do it."

Turton contends that Crenshaw called him the following Monday and instructed him to "just leave the conduit[,]" which Turton believed was an acceptance of option 3 "to settle any kind of dispute on the trespassing[.]" However, Turton admits that Crenshaw never actually stated he was choosing option 3 or settling any trespass claim; Crenshaw simply used the same language Turton had used in option 3 of the letter. According to Crenshaw, he informed Turton on Monday that "this ain't gonna work" because he did not consider any of the options acceptable, and instructed Turton "not to remove [the conduit] until we get this thing settled." In the same conversation, Crenshaw told Turton that Southern Fiber would have to pay him $10,000 to service the Woodstone tenants. Turton testified that in his mind Crenshaw's statements covered different subjects: Crenshaw's statement to leave the conduit was Crenshaw selecting option 3 of the letter to resolve the trespass issue, and Crenshaw's statement demanding $10,000 was his price for Southern Fiber to service Woodstone's tenants. Southern Fiber did not return to Woodstone Townhouses to complete the installation because Turton "wasn't going to pay [Crenshaw] $10,000[.]"

On October 25, 2017, Southern Fiber received a call about another water leak at Woodstone Townhouses, purportedly caused by GBT employees who were working nearby. Although GBT employees stated that they did not cause the leak, the leak was not where Southern Fiber previously had broken the water line, and Turton knew immediately upon his arrival at Woodstone Townhouses that the employees did not cause this water leak, he nevertheless directed the employees to dig up the water pipe and fix it. Turton believed that repairing the water leak "would take...