This dispute arises out of the sale of Unit Two in the Paxton Building condominium in Savannah, Georgia. Quality Foods, Inc. bought the unit from Johan Heinz Lindeman and Gisela Margarette Lindeman, as trustees of the Lindeman Family Trust. Condominium unit owners Roy and Lynn Smithberg, Dennis Barr, Stanley E. Strickland, and C. Ansley Williams collectively, “the Smithbergs” sued the Lindemans, individually and as trustees of the Trust, Quality Foods, and Darby Bank & Trust Co.1 seeking to have the sale to Quality Foods, as well as certain other conveyances involving Unit Two, set aside on the grounds that the conveyances were in violation of the building’s Declaration of Condominium. Quality Foods and Darby Bank collectively, “Quality Foods” filed a counterclaim against the Smithbergs and the Paxton Building Condominium Association, Inc. the “Association” seeking a declaration that, as against the Smithbergs and the Association, they were the lawful owner and mortgagee of Unit Two; that the transactions under which they obtained their interests were not subject to being set aside; and that if the transactions were subject to being set aside that title in Unit Two would re-vest in the Trust. Quality Foods also asserted a claim against the Smithbergs for intentional interference with contractual and business relationships, including a claim for punitive damages.
In Case No. A07A1352, Quality Foods contends that the trial court erred in granting the Smithbergs’ motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim for tortious interference with contractual and business relations and for punitive damages. Quality Foods further contends that the trial court erred in denying its motion for partial summary judgment on the Smithbergs’ complaint and its counterclaim. The Smithbergs cross-appeal in Case No. A07A1353, contending that they had a right of first refusal to purchase Unit Two in their capacity as individual unit owners, and that the trial court therefore erred in denying their motion for summary judgment. For reasons which follow, we reverse in part and affirm in part the judgment in Case No. A07A1352 and affirm the judgment in Case No. A07A1353. We conduct a de novo review of both the law and the evidence on appeal from the grant or denial of a motion for summary judgment. We view the evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmovant in order to determine whether a genuine issue of material fact exists and whether the moving party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.2 The evidence shows that The Paxton Building, a Condominium, was formed and its Declaration of Condominium made on June 17, 1985. The Declaration provides that the condominium is to be operated by the Association, a not-for-profit Georgia corporation. Each floor of the five-story condominium building constitutes a unit. Johan and Gisela Lindeman purchased Unit Two in 1985.
