Alexander v. Watson

Ne’Chanta Alexander “Alexander” filed suit against her aunt, Ella Mae Alexander Watson, seeking specific performance of a settlement agreement, and the case proceeded to a bench trial.1 Following Alexander’s presentation of evidence, the trial court dismissed the action in accordance with OCGA § 9-11-41 b. Alexander appeals. For reasons that follow, we affirm. 1. As a threshold matter, we must ascertain the appropriate standard of appellate review for a trial court’s dismissal pursuant to OCGA § 9-11-41 b. Alexander asserts that we must review the ruling under the “plain error” standard. In the alternative, Alexander maintains that the trial court’s ruling should be treated as a directed verdict, in which this Court must construe the evidence in the light most favorable to Alexander. We disagree.

It is well-settled that, in a bench trial, the trial court serves as the finder of fact.2 Thus, to the extent that the trial court resolves evidentiary disputes, we affirm if there is any evidence to support the trial court’s findings.3 OCGA § 9-11-41 b provides, in pertinent part, that after the plaintiff, in an action tried by the court without a jury, has completed the presentation of his evidence, the defendant, without waiving his right to offer evidence in the event the motion is not granted, may move for dismissal on the ground that upon the facts and the law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief. The court as trier of the facts may then determine the facts and render judgment against the plaintiff or may decline to render any judgment until the close of all the evidence.4 It is evident from this language that the dismissal of a case pursuant to this code section is not tantamount to granting a directed verdict, and a trial court is not required to construe the evidence in the plaintiff’s favor.5 Rather, the statute makes clear that the trial court is acting as factfinder. Accordingly, even if the plaintiff makes out a prima facie case, the trial court may nonetheless dismiss the case, and we will affirm unless the evidence demands a contrary finding.6