Wang v. Liu

The trial court erred in making permanent an interlocutory injunction prohibiting the appellant from transferring certain assets while the appellee's underlying suit against him was pending without notice to, or consent of, the parties.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In July 2011, Jing Liu sued Hao Wang in Fulton County, alleging that Wang holds stock in a Chinese company, that Wang holds this stock on behalf of Liu, that Wang has misappropriated the stock to his own use, and that Wang has wrongfully withheld distributions and other funds derived from his holding of the stock, to all of which Liu is entitled.1 A few weeks later, the trial court entered an interlocutory injunction that prohibited Wang from transferring certain assets while the lawsuit is pending, and Wang moved to dismiss the lawsuit pursuant to the doctrine of forum non conveniens. In February 2012, the trial court denied the motion to dismiss the lawsuit, stayed the lawsuit pending the resolution of a related lawsuit in China, and ordered that “the interlocutory injunction is hereby made permanent.” Wang appeals from the denial of his motion to dismiss and from the order making permanent the interlocutory injunction. Upon our review of the record and briefs, we conclude that Wang has failed to show that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied his motion to dismiss, but we conclude that the trial court erred when it entered a permanent injunction without adequate notice to, or the consent of, the parties. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of the motion to dismiss, but we vacate the order making permanent the interlocutory injunction.

1. We turn first to the denial of the motion to dismiss under the doctrine of forum non conveniens. When a trial court considers such a motion, it must apply the standard that appears in OCGA § 9-10-31.1 a:

Wang v. Liu

The trial court erred in making permanent an interlocutory injunction prohibiting the appellant from transferring certain assets while the appellee's underlying suit against him was pending without notice to, or consent of, the parties.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report