Woods v. Hall

The trial court erred in refusing to consider the plaintiff's affidavit filed in opposition to the defendant's summary judgment motion on the ground that it was not timely, since O.C.G.A. § 9-11-56 c provides that a party may serve an opposing affidavit prior to the day of hearing, and the plaintiff filed his affidavit three days before the scheduled hearing.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In this civil tort action, Mell Woods, acting pro se, sued Bruce Hall and several unknown defendants, alleging that Hall’s filing a simple battery charge against him constituted malicious prosecution. Following the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in Hall’s favor, Woods appeals, arguing that 1 genuine issues of material fact exist as to his malicious prosecution claim, and that the trial court erred in 2 excluding his affidavit from consideration because it was not timely filed, 3 awarding attorney fees to Hall’s counsel, and 4 exhibiting prejudice toward Woods. For the reasons set forth infra , we vacate the grant of summary judgment and the award of attorney fees to Hall’s counsel, and we remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party,1 the record shows that Woods and Hall were neighbors, who, in late 2001 or early 2002, became involved in a heated dispute based on Hall’s alleged failure to control his large and less-than-friendly dog. This dispute ultimately culminated in Woods shooting and killing the dog. As a result, Hall swore out an arrest warrant for Woods in the Superior Court of Liberty County. Woods eventually pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge stemming from that incident and received a probated sentence.

On February 1, 2002, not long after the dog-shooting incident, Woods and Hall’s ongoing neighborhood dispute led to an altercation in which Woods allegedly hit Hall. Consequently, on April 8, 2002, Hall swore out another arrest warrant for Woods in the Magistrate Court of Liberty County, which charged Woods with simple battery. The warrant was signed that same day by a magistrate court judge. Woods was bonded out immediately on his own recognizance, and thereafter, he retained counsel, who filed various motions related to the case, including a demand for a jury trial.

Woods v. Hall

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report