The Recorder's Court of Chatham County v. the Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah ( 2017 )


Menu:
  • Court of Appeals
    of the State of Georgia
    ATLANTA,____________________
    May 22, 2017
    The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
    A17A0598. THE RECORDER’S COURT OF CHATHAM COUNTY et al. v.
    THE MAYOR AND ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF SAVANNAH.
    The Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah (“the City”) has moved to
    dismiss this appeal as moot. For the reasons set forth below, we grant the motion and
    dismiss the appeal.
    The appeal is from two orders: (1) the trial court’s September 6, 2016, order
    granting the City’s request for a declaratory judgment that the City was authorized to
    release certain documents in response to a request under Georgia’s Open Records
    Act, OCGA § 50-18-70 et seq., and enjoining the Recorder’s Court of Chatham
    County (“the Recorder’s Court”) and its Chief Judge from enforcing an order
    exempting those documents from release; and (2) the trial court’s August 31, 2016,
    order adding the Chief Judge of the Recorder’s Court as a defendant in the underlying
    declaratory judgment action.
    We hereby dismiss the appeal from the September 6 order. It is undisputed that,
    at this point, the City has released the documents. Consequently, the parties’ disputes
    over the City’s rights and responsibilities regarding the release of the documents
    under the Open Records Act and the enforceability of the Recorder’s Court order
    exempting the documents’ release are moot. See Clark v. Deal, 
    298 Ga. 893
    , 894 (2)
    (785 SE2d 524) (2016). Conceding that these issues are “effectively moot,” the
    Recorder’s Court and the Chief Judge argue that we should still address the issues in
    the interest of determining their counterclaims for attorney fees, which the trial court
    did not address in his orders and which appear to remain pending below. But as we
    have held in rejecting a similar argument, an “appellate court is not required to retain
    a moot case and decide it because a party might possibly derive some future benefit
    from a favorable adjudication on an abstract question.” Ladder Now v. Hancock
    Roofing & Constr., 
    337 Ga. App. 399
    , 400 (787 SE2d 775) (2016) (citation and
    punctuation omitted).
    We also dismiss the appeal from the August 31 order. “No longer piggybacked
    on th[e] directly appealable issue [of the correctness of the September 6 order
    granting a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief], the [interlocutory order adding
    the Chief Judge as a party-defendant] has no independent basis for direct appeal. For
    that reason, the appeal from the [August 31] order . . . must be dismissed as well.”
    Ladder Now, 337 Ga. App. at 400-401 (citations omitted).
    Accordingly, the City’s motion to dismiss this appeal is GRANTED.
    Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
    Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________
    05/22/2017
    I certify that the above is a true extract from
    the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.
    Witness my signature and the seal of said court
    hereto affixed the day and year last above written.
    , Clerk.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: A17A0598

Filed Date: 5/25/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 5/25/2017