Scarborough v. Hunter

Summary

The Georgia Supreme Court held that the Stephens County Board of Commissioners did not grossly abuse its discretion by abandoning Winding Bluff Road under Georgia’s county-road abandonment statute. The Court reversed the trial court’s order setting aside the abandonment and the related writ of mandamus requiring road repair and maintenance, and vacated the attorney-fee award. It also vacated summary judgment on the Board’s counterclaims and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. A county Board's decision to abandon a public road under OCGA § 32-7-2 (b) (1) may be set aside in mandamus only when the decision is so arbitrary or capricious as to constitute a gross abuse of discretion; the reviewing court may not reweigh the evidence or substitute its judgment for the Board's.
2. Because the trial court's mandamus order was expressly predicated on its erroneous setting aside of the Board's abandonment decision, reversal of the abandonment ruling also requires reversal of the mandamus order.
3. A party is a prevailing party entitled to an attorney-fee award under OCGA § 13-6-11 only if it obtains damages or other affirmative relief on its underlying claims; after reversal of the plaintiffs' affirmative relief, the plaintiffs were no longer prevailing parties.
4. The trial court's summary judgment for the plaintiffs on the Board's counterclaims must be vacated when the grant was based substantially on the rulings concerning abandonment and mandamus that were being reversed.
5. The Georgia Administrative Procedure Act does not apply to local governments or local administrative bodies that are not state agencies within the APA's statutory definitions.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court properly set aside the Board's decision to abandon Winding Bluff Road as arbitrary, capricious, and a gross abuse of discretion.
2. Whether the trial court properly issued a writ of mandamus requiring the Board to repair and maintain the road after setting aside the abandonment decision.
3. Whether the plaintiffs remained prevailing parties entitled to attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 after the abandonment and mandamus rulings were reversed.
4. Whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs on the Board's counterclaims.
5. Whether the Georgia Administrative Procedure Act governed judicial review of the county Board's road-abandonment decision.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded