Preview:

Final Copy 290 Ga. 813 S11A1705. JAMES v. INTOWN VENTURES, LLC.

THOMPSON, Justice. Appellant Rita James appeals from the trial court's order granting partial summary judgment in favor of appellee Intown Ventures, LLC, on its claim for ejectment. For the reasons that follow, we reverse. It appears from the limited record before this Court that in 1964 James and her husband Willie purchased property consisting of two lots and a single-family home constructed across the lots.1 James and Willie lived on the property known to them as 539 Baker Circle until 1978 when they divorced. James received the property as part of the final divorce decree, and Willie executed a warranty deed conveying to James his interest in the property and using the same legal description as the 1964 warranty deed. In 1997, Fulton County issued tax fi. fas. against Archie R. James, Jr., for

This property was described as "Land Lot 178 of the 14th District of Fulton County, Georgia, being Lots 1 and 2, Block C, ARLINGTON PARK PLACE Subdivision." This description was followed by a more particular legal description marking the boundaries of the property by measurements between iron pins placed on the property and as having a house number of 539 Baker Circle.

1

property identified as Baker Circle N.W. and a tax identification number of 140178-0005-046-5. James does not know Archie James and is not familiar with property simply known as "Baker Circle N.W." or "0 Baker Circle N.W." The county subsequently sold "0 Baker Circle" in November 2002 to Intown.2 In 2004, Intown filed a petition to quiet title with regard to the purchased property and named as defendants several entities and individuals, including James, based on its claim that it purchased some portion of James' property at the sale.3 James did not file any pleadings in the case, although a return of service indicates she was served with the summons and complaint. The trial judge appointed a special master to examine the pleadings, determine who was entitled to notice and ensure proper notice was given, determine the validity and extent of Intown's title and all other interests in the property which may be adverse to its title, and make a report of her findings. The special master found James was properly served in the quiet title action but
The county issued and had recorded a tax deed identifying the property sold as "[t]hat tract or parcel of land conveyed by deed to Rita J. James Recorded at 129, per Records of Fulton County, Georgia. Property known as Baker Cir. N.W. and Tax Parcel ID# 14-0178-0005-046-5 per records of the Fulton County Tax Commissioner and plat maps of the Fulton County Tax Assessors office." The action was filed to quiet title to "a tract of land, being known as `0 Baker Circle N.W.,' being also known as tax parcel ID No. 14-0178-0005-046-5."
3 2

2

failed to file a responsive pleading and that Intown held valid, fee simple title to the property. After consideration of the special master's report, the trial court in March 2005 issued its judgment holding that Intown held fee simple title to the property free and clear of any interest held by the named defendants, including James. No appeal was taken from this judgment. In September 2005, James filed a petition for bankruptcy under Chapter 13 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. She included the property in her list of assets but did not list Intown as a creditor. In 2008, Intown filed an action in Fulton County Superior Court seeking damages and the ejectment of James from the property. James filed an answer, defenses, and counterclaims, asserting for the first time that Intown has no right to or interest in the property, that the tax sale and subsequent deed are void and invalid due to irregularities, and that the judgment in the quiet title action is void because she was not properly served with the complaint. James also filed a notice of bankruptcy filing, which caused the trial court to enter a stay of all proceedings in the ejectment action. After James' discharge from bankruptcy in April 2009, the court's stay was lifted, and Intown filed a motion for partial summary judgment on its claim 3

for ejectment. The trial court determined, based on the special master's report and the judgment entered in the quiet title action, that James was properly served in the previous litigation and because she failed to file any responsive pleadings or defenses in that action, she was barred by res judicata from challenging the quiet title judgment in the present action. See OCGA

Download S11A1705. JAMES v. INTOWN VENTURES, LLC.pdf

Georgia Law