Betallic, Inc. v. Deavours
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Sears-Collins, Justice.
We agree with the Court of Appeals’ conclusion in this case and with that court’s construction of OCGA § 9-15-14, except that part where the court finds that a claim for litigation costs and attorney *797fees assessed for frivolous actions and defenses is available only to a “prevailing party.” Deavours v. Hog Mtn. Creations, 207 Ga. App. 557 (428 SE2d 388) (1993). OCGA § 9-15-14 does not limit recovery to a certain party, but permits any party to recover from another party who has “unnecessarily expanded the proceeding by . . . improper conduct, including, but not limited…
2Cited by15 opinions
- FAIRBURN BANKING COMPANY v. GaffordSupreme Court of Georgia · 1994
- Brewer v. PaulkCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2009
- McCullough v. McCulloughSupreme Court of Georgia · 1994
- Hamil v. StanfordSupreme Court of Georgia · 1994
- Reese v. GrantSupreme Court of Georgia · 2004
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.