Water Park Properties, LLC v. City of Helen, Georgia

• Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
• Decided: April 30, 2014
• Docket: A14A1416
• Status: Published

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,__________________ April 30, 2014

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A14A1416. WATER PARK PROPERTIES, LLC. v. CITY OF HELEN, GEORGIA.

The City of Helen filed a declaratory judgment action against Water Park Properties, LLC and others, seeking a declaration that certain river tubing activities were in violation of the city’s zoning ordinance because they were not being conducted in public recreational areas, where conditional use permits are not required, and instead were conducted on private recreation areas, where such permits are required. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the city as to its claims against Water Park, and we affirmed the summary judgment ruling in an unpublished opinion. See Water Park Properties, LLC. v. City of Helen, Georgia, Case Number A13A0829 (decided November 14, 2013). Following our ruling, Water Park argued in the trial court that it had reserved the issue of whether its tubing operation was permitted because the property in question could be classified as a “park.” The trial court found that Water Park had not reserved the issue. The trial court also cited this Court’s appellate opinion, in which we specifically found that Water Park had abandoned its contention that its use of the property in question was a permitted park use. Water Park appeals from that ruling. We, however, lack jurisdiction. An appeal is subject to dismissal when the questions presented are moot. See OCGA § 5-6-48 (b) (3). Mootness results “if the rights insisted upon could not be enforced by a judicial determination.” Randolph County v. Johnson, 282 Ga. 160 (1) (646 SE2d 261) (2007). A matter is also moot if a ruling would have no practical effect on the alleged controversy. See Carlock v. Kmart Corp., 227 Ga. App. 356, 361 (3) (a) (489 SE2d 99) (1997). Here, the declaratory judgment claim had been resolved, and our decision affirming the trial court’s summary judgment order served as a final adjudication of this matter. See Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Bullington, 227 Ga. 485, 485-486 (2) (181 SE2d 495) (1971); OCGA § 9-11-60 (h). This ruling is binding on the lower court. See OCGA § 9-11-60 (h). Any subsequent appeal is thus moot and subject to dismissal. See OCGA § 5-6-48 (b) (3); Wilkinson v. Household Finance Corp., III, 250 Ga. App. 131, 132 (550 SE2d 677) (2001) (ruling in first appeal moots second appeal). Because review of the trial court’s order would have no practical effect at this point, the issues raised in Water Park’s appeal are moot, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 04/30/2014 Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,__________________ I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.