McFarland & Assocs. PC v. Hewatt

Is a motion for contempt made more than 30 days after entry of a court order directing compliance with postjudgment discovery a new proceeding within the meaning of OCGA § 15-6-77 e 1 We hold it is, and affirm the superior court’s refusal to order the clerk to accept such a contempt motion without proffer of the appropriate filing fees.

The following chronology is undisputed: The law firm of McFarland & Associates, P.C. obtained a judgment against Lawrence David Hewatt on April 29, 1998. On May 14, 1998, post-judgment interrogatories were accepted for filing without any additional filing fee. More than thirty days passed without response by defendant. On August 14, 1998, the superior court ordered defendant to comply with postjudgment discovery within 15 days. In November of 1998, McFarland attempted to file a “Motion for Contempt Order,” but since this motion was presented more than thirty days after the August 14 order, the clerk’s office informed McFarland that a filing fee would be due. McFarland refused to pay any additional filing fee, and, in order to avoid an argument, the deputy clerk filed the motion without charging a filing fee.1 The superior court denied McFarland’s “Motion for Order to Clerk,” seeking to compel the clerk to file McFarland’s contempt motion without additional costs, and McFarland appeals this order.