Expedia Inc. v. City of Columbus

These cases arise out of the Georgia Supreme Court’s decision in Expedia, Inc. v. City of Columbus , 285 Ga. 684 681 SE2d 122 2009. Therein the Supreme Court held that pursuant to OCGA § 48-13-50 and the Hotel-Motel Occupancy Excise Tax Ordinance of the City of Columbus the “City”, Expedia must remit hotel occupancy taxes to the City based on the full room rate it charged its customers rather the wholesale rate it agreed to pay the hotel for the room. Id. at 689 4.1 Expedia’s liability for past taxes, penalties, interest, costs, expenses, and attorney fees remain to be decided in the trial court. In Case Nos. A10A0563 and A10A0826, Expedia appeals by direct and discretionary appeals, respectively, from a September 15, 2009 discovery order the “September 15 order” entered below in which the trial court adopted the report of its appointed special master and granted the City’s Motion to Strike Privilege Claims, Work Product Immunity, and to Compel the Production of Documents. In its appellate brief in Case No. A10A0826, Expedia addresses the threshold question of jurisdiction common to each of its appeals. In this regard, Expedia contends that the September 15 order is immediately reviewable before this Court i as a collateral order, ii as “in substance and effect” a final judgment pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-34 a 1, and iii as in furtherance of this Court’s original jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief. Finding that the trial court’s September 15 order is an interlocutory discovery order, not a collateral order from which a direct appeal may be taken; no other basis for subject matter jurisdiction exists; and that in seeking discretionary review Expedia failed to comply with the interlocutory procedures in OCGA § 5-6-34 b, we dismiss both cases for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.2

“Trial courts have broad discretion to control discovery, including the imposition of sanctions. Absent the showing of a clear abuse of discretion, a court’s exercise of that broad discretion will not be reversed.” Citations omitted and punctuation omitted. Deep South Constr., Inc. v. Slack , 248 Ga. App. 183, 185 1 546 SE2d 302 2001.