Brandon D. Wagner Successfully Defended Two Counterclaims on Behalf of Community Association Clients
Brandon D. Wagner successfully defended two separate counterclaims; one at the trial level, and one taken to the Georgia Court of Appeals.
Order Granting Summary Judgment in favor of the Association on its Claims and Against the Defendant’s Counterclaims – In a lawsuit involving collection an owner’s unpaid assessments, the owner filed a counterclaim against the association alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (the “FDCPA”) and sought recovery of monies alleging spent to repair portions of the condominium building that the association was obligated to maintain. The owner’s theory of recovery was quantum meruit and unjust enrichment. Brandon D. Wagner filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on both the association’s claims and the counterclaim. The trial court granted Summary Judgment, finding that there was no dispute regarding the association’s claims. With respect to the the counterclaim, the Court agreed that the FDCPA does not apply to the association and further found that the owner’s claims for recovery under quantum meruit and unjust enrichment are inapplicable when there is an express contract. The court found that the declaration of covenants constitutes an express contract, thus barring recovery under those theories. The court also found that even if there were no contract, the owner had not introduced sufficient evidence to sustain his claims for monies spent or that there was an expectation of repayment.
Order affirming the Trial Court Granting Summary Judgment – Brandon brought suit on behalf of an association client, seeking an Order for unpaid assessments and judicial foreclosure. Both Defendant owners had been in bankruptcy at two different times and received two separate discharges. Subsequent to the bankruptcy discharges, they entered in a forbearance agreement whereby they agreed to make certain payments towards the lien balance. Ultimately, the Defendants defaulted, and the suit was filed. After being served, the owners failed to file an Answer to the original complaint. The Association then filed an Amended Complaint and a Motion for Summary Judgment. In response to the Motion for Summary Judgment, the owners filed a Counterclaim and responded to the Motion for Summary Judgment, arguing that amounts sought were barred by the statute of limitations. The trial court granted the Association’s Motion and dismissed the Counterclaim as untimely. The owners then filed an appeal of the trial court’s Judgment. In response, Brandon Wagner filed a Motion for Supersedeas Bond, which was granted by the trial court. The owners appealed the Bond as well, but the appeal was ultimately dismissed. With respect to the first appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order, finding that the forbearance agreement that the owners signed in 2013 was a new debt, which revived the statute of limitations and found that the counterclaim was filed untimely as the fact that an amended complaint was filed did not trigger a new deadline for the owners to file an Answer.
Brandon D. Wagner is an associate in the Alpharetta office of Lueder, Larkin & Hunter where his practice focuses on litigation and collections. Brandon can be reached at bwagner@luederlaw.com.