Betallic, Inc. v. Deavours
This text of 439 S.E.2d 643 (Betallic, Inc. v. Deavours) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
We agree with the Court of Appeals’ conclusion in this case and with that court’s construction of OCGA § 9-15-14, except that part where the court finds that a claim for litigation costs and attorney [797]*797fees assessed for frivolous actions and defenses is available only to a “prevailing party.” Deavours v. Hog Mtn. Creations, 207 Ga. App. 557 (428 SE2d 388) (1993). OCGA § 9-15-14 does not limit recovery to a certain party, but permits any party to recover from another party who has “unnecessarily expanded the proceeding by . . . improper conduct, including, but not limited to, abuses of discovery.” OCGA § 9-15-14 (b).
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
439 S.E.2d 643, 263 Ga. 796, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/betallic-inc-v-deavours-ga-1994.