Liberty Cap. LLC v. First Chatham Bank

The trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the bank on its claim for specific performance, because the bank failed to show that there was no genuine issue of material fact as to the adequacy of damages as the legal remedy for nonperformance of an agreement the defendant made to purchase a loan.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

This is the second appearance in this Court of an action by First Chatham Bank against Liberty Capital, LLC to specifically enforce an agreement by Liberty Capital to purchase a loan related to the development of four residential lots, and for other relief. In First Chatham Bank v. Liberty Capital, LLC, 325 Ga. App. 821 755 SE2d 219 2014 physical precedent only, we affirmed the trial court’s denial of First Chatham’s motion for summary judgment on its claim for specific performance. Following remand, the parties agreed to equitably reform the residential lot numbers identified in Liberty Capital’s letter to First Chatham in which Liberty Capital committed to purchase the loan, after which First Chatham and Liberty Capital filed cross-motions for summary judgment. The trial court granted First Chatham’s motion for summary judgment and denied Liberty Capital’s motion for summary judgment.

On appeal, Liberty Capital contends that the trial court erred by i granting summary judgment to First Chatham on its claim for specific performance, ii denying summary judgment to Liberty Capital on First Chatham’s claims for fraud and misrepresentation, iii failing to transfer the case to Cobb County, Georgia, where venue was proper, and iv granting summary judgment to First Chatham while there remained genuine issues of material fact. For the reasons set forth below, we hold that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to First Chatham on its claim for specific performance and in denying Liberty Capital’s motion for summary judgment on First Chatham’s claims for negligent misrepresentation and fraud. We find Liberty Capital’s contention that the trial court erred in failing to transfer this case to be abandoned. Accordingly, we affirm in part and reverse in part.

Liberty Cap. LLC v. First Chatham Bank

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report