Allen v. Sea Gardens Seafood Inc.

Even if the purported consent judgment could be construed as an order enforcing the parties' settlement agreement, the trial court impermissibly modified the permit provision by eliminating its function as a condition precedent to the agreement.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Appellants James Allen and John Littlefield appeal from the trial court’s entry of a consent judgment purporting to resolve their ongoing dispute with Appellee Sea Gardens Seafood, Inc. over title to waterfront property in McIntosh County. Because both parties did not in fact consent to all terms of the consent judgment, the trial court erred in issuing it, and we therefore vacate and remand for further proceedings in the trial court. In 2007, Sea Gardens petitioned under OCGA § 23-3-60 to quiet title to the property in question, naming Appellants, who own adjoining property, as the only potential adverse claimants. Thereafter, Sea Gardens filed a declaratory judgment action against Appellants seeking a determination as to ownership of a dock adjacent to the property. After over four years of litigation, during a pretrial conference, the parties reached a settlement, which was memorialized in a handwritten “outline,” signed by the parties and their attorneys, and presented in open court to the trial judge as the basis on which a formal consent judgment would be prepared and ultimately signed by the parties and entered by the court.

Under the settlement as outlined, the parties agreed on the location of the property line dividing Sea Gardens’ and Appellants’ respective parcels and apportioned the dock. As consideration, Appellants agreed to pay Sea Gardens “the sum of $50,000 within 60 days of this agreement.” The final paragraph of the handwritten outline provides that “this agreement is conditioned upon the parties obtaining any necessary permits or authorizations.” This provision was explained to the trial court by Sea Gardens’ counsel as follows: “the agreement is conditioned on the parties obtaining any necessary permits or authorizations such as Department of Natural Resources permits or otherwise that may be requested.”

Allen v. Sea Gardens Seafood Inc.

Even if the purported consent judgment could be construed as an order enforcing the parties' settlement agreement, the trial court impermissibly modified the permit provision by eliminating its function as a condition precedent to the agreement.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report