Ga. Code Ann. § 13-6-11

Section 13-6-11 requires an award of reasonable attorney fees when defendants’ failure to respond puts the plaintiff to unnecessary trouble and expense.

Hartford Insurance v. Mobley · filed 1982-11-10

Therefore, as a matter of law, appellees put appellant to unnecessary trouble and expense within the meaning of Code Ann. § 20-1404.

Section 13-6-11 allows litigation expenses when a defendant with no defense forces a plaintiff to sue to collect, causing unnecessary trouble and expense.

Sawgrass Builders, Inc. v. Realty Cooperative, Inc. · filed 1984-10-05

Where no defense exists, as in this case, forcing a plaintiff to resort to the courts in order to collect is plainly causing him “unnecessary trouble and expense.”

Section 13-6-11 permits a jury to award litigation expenses when the defendant puts the plaintiff to unnecessary trouble and expense.

Khoury v. Skidaway Island Engineering, Inc. · filed 1984-10-31

Under the circumstances of this case, we believe that the jury was authorized by law and fact to find that appellant was liable to appellee for the costs of litigation, having put appellee to unnecessary trouble and expense. OCGA § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees when a defendant forces a plaintiff to sue to collect an undisputed debt, causing unnecessary trouble and expense.

A. P. S. S., Inc. v. Clary & Associates, Inc. · filed 1986-03-06

Where there is no bona fide controversy, forcing a plaintiff to resort to the courts in order to collect clearly causes that plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense. ... Clearly, the trial court’s finding was justified, and clearly appellee was put to unnecessary trouble and expense within the meaning of OCGA § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 allows compensatory attorney fees and litigation costs when a defendant forces a plaintiff to sue despite no bona fide controversy.

Rogers v. Georgia Ports Authority · filed 1987-06-01

Damages ex contractu brought under OCGA § 13-6-11 are compensatory, not punitive or vindictive. ... However, forcing a plaintiff to sue where no bona fide controversy exists causes unnecessary trouble and expense and would authorize attorney fees and costs of litigation. ... Under such circumstances, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the Authority as to compensatory attorney fees and costs of litigation.

Section 13-6-11 permits expenses of litigation when a defendant forces a claimant to sue for an undisputed debt, causing unnecessary trouble and expense.

BRUNSWICK MANUFACTURING CO., INC. v. Sizemore · filed 1987-06-16

We find no error in the award of expenses of litigation. In view of the uncontradicted evidence that the plaintiffs were entitled to the compensation they sought, there clearly was no bona fide controversy and forcing plaintiffs to resort to the courts in order to collect is plainly causing them unnecessary trouble and expense.

Section 13-6-11 permits litigation expenses when a defendant forces a plaintiff to sue despite there being no bona fide dispute over liability.

Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. Fulton County · filed 1987-07-13

Where there is no bona fide dispute with regard to liability, a defendant’s action in forcing a plaintiff to bring suit in order to recover causes the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense within the meaning of that phrase in OCGA § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees when the defendant causes the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense; acknowledging a debt and disputing it only after suit is filed can support that finding.

SOUTHERN MEDICAL CORP. v. Willis · filed 1990-03-08

Evidence in the case sub judice showing that corporate defendant acknowledged the debt to plaintiff, never disputing the quality of plaintiff’s work or the amount of plaintiff’s bill until after suit was filed, was sufficient to authorize a finding that corporate defendant caused plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense.

Section 13-6-11 permits an award of litigation expenses for unnecessary trouble and expense when no bona fide controversy exists and the defendant forces the plaintiff to sue to collect.

Backus Cadillac-Pontiac, Inc. v. Ernest · filed 1990-04-27

The primary key to the test is whether there exists a bona fide controversy, and where none exists, forcing a plaintiff to resort to the courts in order to collect is plainly causing him to go to unnecessary trouble and expense within the meaning of OCGA § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 permits recovery of litigation expenses when the defendant acts in bad faith, is stubbornly litigious, or causes the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense.

Burlington Air Express, Inc. v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. · filed 1995-04-05

OCGA § 13-6-11 provides for expenses of litigation ‘where the defendant has acted in bad faith, has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense.’ ... Since the record contains some evidence of bad faith, Burlington’s argument regarding the existence of a bona fide controversy is irrelevant. Kneller, supra.

Section 13-6-11 permits fees and litigation expenses when a plaintiff incurs unnecessary trouble and expense beyond that normally associated with litigation.

MDC BLACKSHEAR, LLC v. Littell · filed 2000-10-23

Under § 13-6-11, fees and expenses may be awarded when a plaintiff is caused unnecessary trouble and expense above the normal trouble and expense associated with litigation.

Section 13-6-11 allows litigation expenses and attorney fees for bad faith or unnecessary trouble and expense; those issues are generally for the factfinder.

Irwin County v. Owens · filed 2002-07-03

Questions of bad faith and unnecessary expense under that Code section are generally for the factfinder. ... Such actions supported a finding that the County had acted in bad faith and had put Owens to unnecessary trouble and expense.

Section 13-6-11 permits litigation expenses when a defendant forces a plaintiff to sue to collect an undisputed debt.

Fresh Floors, Inc. v. Forrest Cambridge Apartments, LLC · filed 2002-08-12

Here, there was no bona fide controversy, and Forrest Cambridge caused Fresh Floors unnecessary trouble and expense by forcing Fresh Floors to resort to litigation to collect the undisputed debt.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees when evidence shows that a defendant caused unnecessary trouble and expense by refusing to make adequate repairs.

Clearwater Construction Co. v. McClung · filed 2003-06-19

There is some evidence to support the trial court’s finding that Clearwater caused unnecessary trouble and expense to McClung by a “sue me” attitude regarding doing anything beyond the patch repairs Anderton recommended.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees when a debtor causes unnecessary trouble and expense by forcing a creditor to sue to collect a plainly owed debt.

Hope Electric Enterprises, Inc. v. Proforce Staffing, Inc. · filed 2004-06-15

By forcing Proforce to resort to litigation in order to collect the debt plainly owed under the contract, Hope Electric has caused Proforce unnecessary trouble and expense, and the trial court did not err in awarding Proforce attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees when the defendant causes the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense, and an award stands if evidence supports it.

Hall v. Blassingame · filed 2004-09-22

We will not disturb a trial court’s award of attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 unless there is no evidence to support that award. ... There was abundant evidence here to support the trial court’s conclusion that APS had caused Blassingame unnecessary trouble and expense in his efforts to obtain a hearing. The trial court properly awarded attorney fees to Blassingame.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or causing unnecessary trouble and expense without a finding of bad faith.

Hampshire Homes, Inc. v. Espinosa Construction Services, Inc. · filed 2007-12-03

Moreover, the court here found that Hampshire Homes had been stubbornly litigious and further had caused the Espinosa companies unnecessary trouble and expense, which findings it supported with specific examples. Such constitute independent grounds for awarding attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 permits a jury to award litigation expenses when evidence supports a finding that the defendant acted in bad faith or caused unnecessary trouble and expense.

Johnson v. GAPVT Motors, Inc. · filed 2008-06-18

There is evidence from which the jury could find that GAPVT acted in bad faith in the underlying transaction and has caused Johnson unnecessary trouble and expense and that it violated the Fair Business Practices Act and injured Johnson thereby.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense only when no bona fide controversy exists between the parties.

Cashatt v. Merrimac Associates, Inc. · filed 2012-02-17

Recovery of attorney fees under O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11 on the basis of stubborn litigiousness or conduct causing unnecessary trouble and expense may be had only where no bona fide controversy exists between the parties. ... The Court thus finds as a matter of law that Plaintiff is not entitled to attorney fees on grounds of stubborn litigiousness or conduct causing unnecessary trouble and expense.

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees for unnecessary trouble and expense when a bona fide controversy required the plaintiff to sue.

Bowen v. Laird. · filed 2018-10-30

While the existence of these factors normally is for a jury to decide, if there is no evidence to support such findings, then, as a matter of law, attorney fees are not authorized. ... Here, due to the duplicate conveyances, there was a bona fide controversy as to the title of the 8.45-acre parcel.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees when a party’s refusal to participate in required arbitration causes the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and litigation expense, if evidence supports that finding.

XU v. YONNONE · filed 2022-06-21

Xu and He contend that the attorney fees award under OCGA § 13-6-11 should be reversed because there was a bona fide dispute about the party wall. But the trial court did not award attorney fees based on a finding that there was no such bona fide dispute; rather, the court based the award on the refusal of the appellants to participate in arbitration as required by the declaration of covenants. Because there was evidence to support that finding, it must be affirmed.

Section 13-6-11 permits reasonable attorney fees when the defendant causes unnecessary trouble and expense and no bona fide dispute over liability exists.

GRIFFITH v. APPALACHIAN ANTIQUE HARDWOODS LLC · filed 2023-10-11

As a result, Griffith has demonstrated that he is entitled to reasonable attorney fees under O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 allows a claim for litigation expenses to be supported by evidence that a party was stubbornly litigious and caused unnecessary trouble and expense.

Jordan v. Trower · filed 1993-04-29

The evidence was not required to be excluded under OCGA § 24-3-37 and was admissible to support appellee’s contention that appellants were stubbornly litigious and caused her unnecessary trouble and expense by forcing her to litigate her rights to the estate, see Progressive Life, supra, which was relevant to her claim for litigation expenses under OCGA § 13-6-11.

A reasonable ground to contest a contract claim is a defense to attorney’s fees based on bad faith.

ING Global v. United Parcel Service Oasis Supply Corp. · filed 2014-06-30

The jury was properly instructed that a “reasonable ground” to contest a claim was a defense to a finding of bad faith, but rejected UPS’s evidence and arguments on that point, as it was entitled to do.

Section 13-6-11 permits summary judgment against a claim for litigation expenses when the defendant had reasonable grounds to contest the underlying claim.

Mock v. Central Mutual Insurance · filed 2016-01-25

For the same reasons discussed with regard to Plaintiffs claim under O.C.G.A. § 33-4-6(a), Defendant had reasonable grounds to contest Plaintiffs insurance claim. As a result, there is no genuine dispute of material fact under O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11, and Defendant is entitled to summary judgment on this claim.

Section 13-6-11 precludes an award of attorney’s fees when the parties have a bona fide controversy or genuine dispute.

M.C. Anderson v. Golden · filed 1982-12-28

Where there is a bona fide controversy or genuine dispute, an award of attorney’s fees is precluded. ... Based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions, it should be apparent that the Court was presented with a bona fide controversy. Attorney’s fees are therefore denied.

Section 13-6-11 does not permit attorney fees when a bona fide dispute exists and the defendant has a reasonable defense.

Jeff Goolsby Homes Corp. v. Smith · filed 1983-09-07

Because a bona fide dispute existed and defendants had a reasonable defense at trial, they should not have been burdened with plaintiffs’ attorney fees.

A damages award below the amount sought does not, by itself, prevent a jury from considering attorney fees under § 13-6-11.

Camp v. Jordan · filed 1983-10-06

While recognizing the absence of a transcript, appellants argue that the discrepancy between the amount of compensatory damages awarded ($615) and the ad damnum of the amended complaint ($1,200) shows that a bona fide controversy existed and that an award of attorney fees was inappropriate pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 (Code Ann. § 20-1404). We disagree. Such a discrepancy alone will not necessarily defeat submission of the issue of attorney fees to the jury.

When bad faith is not at issue, § 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense if the parties have a genuine dispute.

Dimambro Northend Associates v. Williams · filed 1983-12-06

Thus, in a case where bad faith is not at issue, attorney fees are not authorized under OCGA § 13-6-11 (Code Ann. § 20-1404) if the evidence shows that “a genuine dispute exists — whether of law or fact, on liability or amount of damages, or on any comparable issue. Where [no such genuine dispute] is found, . . . the jury [would be authorized] to award the expenses of litigation.”

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness when a bona fide controversy exists over liability.

Starling, Inc. v. Housing Authority · filed 1984-05-08

The appellant contends that the trial court also erred in disallowing him to develop a claim for attorney fees based on the appellee’s stubborn litigiousness. However, there clearly was no basis for such a claim in this case. ... Under the circumstances, a recovery for attorney fees would not have been authorized.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow attorney fees when the parties have a bona fide controversy and there is no evidence of bad faith.

White Repair & Contracting Co. v. Daniel · filed 1984-06-18

The transcript in the instant case reveals no such supporting evidence. “[W]e are constrained to conclude that attorney fees are not recoverable in this case because there was a bona fide controversy between the parties.

A bona fide dispute over ownership can preclude attorney fees under § 13-6-11.

Allmond v. Walker · filed 1984-12-04

The trial court correctly determined that the evidence in this case would not support an award of attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow attorney's fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when the parties have a bona fide controversy and the defendant did not act in bad faith.

Coldwell Banker Commercial Group, Inc. v. Nodvin · filed 1984-12-05

Under Georgia law, in the absence of bad faith, there can be no recovery of attorney's fees if there exists a bona fide controversy between the parties. ... After a review of all of the evidence in this case, this Court concludes that no reasonable jury could have found that there was no bona fide controversy between the parties.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow litigation expenses as bad faith damages where there is a bona fide controversy.

Hightower v. General Motors Corp. · filed 1985-05-31

The only possible damages for bad faith in this case would be for expenses of litigation under OCGA § 13-6-11. Such bad faith damages are not recoverable where there exists a bona fide controversy.

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees and litigation expenses for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when a bona fide controversy exists over a substantial part of the claim.

Ginsberg v. Termotto · filed 1985-06-13

In view of the fact that a “bona fide controversy” did exist with respect to the appellee’s claim for payment of the gas bills, and in view of the fact that this portion of the claim constituted the lion’s share of the appellee’s total claim, it cannot be said that the appellant was stubbornly litigious or that she caused the appellee unnecessary trouble and expense by defending the suit. Consequently, the award of attorney fees and expenses of litigation to the appellee pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 was not authorized.

A bona fide controversy over liability supports denial of attorney fees as expenses of litigation under § 13-6-11.

Watson v. Dunaway · filed 1985-10-25

The trial court’s denial of Dunaway’s claim for attorney fees is necessarily affirmed, in view of our determination that a bona fide controversy exists over liability.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when there is no bona fide dispute over the defendant’s liability.

Matthews v. Neal, Greene & Clark · filed 1985-11-20

A recovery under the latter two categories is authorized where the evidence reveals no bona fide controversy or dispute with regard to the defendant’s liability.

A bona fide dispute over liability and evidence of good faith can support denying expenses of litigation under § 13-6-11.

Omni Express, Inc. v. Cleveland Express, Inc. · filed 1986-02-25

Reviewing the evidence before the trial court, we find support for the trial court’s ruling against Cleveland on this issue: there was a bona fide controversy concerning which of two corporations was liable to Cleveland; and evidence that the owner of Omni set up a new corporation to buy an existing motor carrier and then sought to have that corporation interline with Cleveland supported Omni’s claim of good faith in the underlying transaction. See OCGA § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow litigation expenses when the defendant had reasonable grounds to contest the claim, even if the plaintiff prevailed on the merits.

City of Marietta v. Holland · filed 1984-03-15

Moreover, since it is clear that, as a matter of law, appellants had reasonable grounds to contest the claim, there is no genuine issue of material fact as to whether any of the criteria of OCGA § 13-6-11 (Code Ann. § 20-1404) are applicable to appellants, and the court erred by failing to grant summary judgment to appellants on this issue.

A plaintiff seeking litigation expenses under former § 13-6-11 must establish a statutory ground; failure to pay a claim alone does not establish bad faith, and refusal to pay a disputed claim does not establish stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense.

Beacon Industries, Inc. v. Vanderbunt Concrete, Ltd. · filed 1984-11-13

Thus, in order for the plaintiff to recover expenses of litigation pursuant to former OCGA § 13-6-11, it is necessary that it demonstrate that one of the three conditions set forth in the statute exists. ... The mere failure of a defendant to pay a claim does not constitute bad faith. ... Moreover, the refusal to pay a disputed claim is not the equivalent of stubborn litigiousness, nor will it support a claim that defendant caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense.

When bad faith is absent, a bona fide dispute over the amount owed precludes attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense.

Carpet Transport, Inc. v. Dixie Truck Tire Co. · filed 1987-12-03

We find that these facts sufficiently establish a bona fide controversy as to. the amount due to Dixie that Carpet Transport should not be penalized for litigating the issue. For that reason, we reverse the portion of the trial court’s judgment awarding attorney fees, and decline to impose a penalty pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-6 for appealing a justiciable issue.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow attorney’s fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when the defendant has a viable defense to a bona fide contract dispute.

Ostrom v. Kapetanakos · filed 1988-01-12

Accordingly, only if appellee produced some evidence of appellants’ “stubborn litigiousness” or that they caused him “unnecessary trouble and expense” would the issue of attorney’s fees have correctly been submitted to the jury in this case. ... Our review of the transcript of this case clearly reveals that there existed a bona fide controversy as to appellee’s performance under the contract and as to the extent to which appellants were contractually liable to compensate appellee for that performance. Accordingly, appellants were not without a defense to appellee’s action seeking to recover under the terms of the contract.

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when a bona fide controversy exists and there is no bad faith.

Backus Cadillac-Pontiac, Inc. v. Brown · filed 1988-02-04

In our opinion, the evidence does not authorize a finding by the jury that the defense of the action brought caused plaintiffs unnecessary trouble and expense or that defendant was being stubbornly litigious. That is, the evidence shows a reasonable defense, a bona fide controversy, as a matter of law.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow attorney fees and litigation expenses for stubborn litigiousness when a bona fide controversy exists over the claim.

Typo-Repro Services, Inc. v. Bishop · filed 1988-09-06

Typo-Repro also contends the trial court erred by failing to award it attorney fees and expenses of litigation pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11. ... The trial court was authorized by this evidence to find that a genuine dispute or bona fide controversy existed, and thus the trial court did not err by refusing to award Typo-Repro attorney fees and expenses of litigation.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow attorney fees for a declaratory judgment over whether a contract exists when the parties’ substantial uncertainty and disagreement establish a bona fide controversy.

General Hospitals of Humana, Inc. v. Jenkins · filed 1988-09-15

Under the circumstances presented here, where the substantial uncertainty and disagreement between the parties led appellee to seek a declaratory judgment as to whether a contract existed between the parties, the award of attorney fees pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 was improper and is accordingly reversed.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow attorney fees when the defendant litigated a bona fide dispute, even if the defendant lost.

Peachtree Purchasing Co. v. Carver · filed 1988-10-31

Nor do we find any other basis upon which the award of attorney fees could be upheld, it being apparent as a matter of law that Peachtree’s refusal to pay Carver the sums called for under the termination agreement stemmed from a bona fide controversy as to whether he had used the consulting arrangement to promote his own interests over those of the company. While the company did not prevail in this dispute, it cannot be assessed attorney fees for litigating it.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow expenses of litigation for stubborn litigiousness when a bona fide controversy exists over damages.

Forester v. McDuffie · filed 1988-11-07

A plaintiff may not recover expenses of litigation for stubborn litigiousness where a bona fide controversy exists. ... Because a bona fide controversy existed as to plaintiff’s damages, plaintiff was not entitled to expenses of litigation on the ground of stubborn litigiousness.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness when evidence supports a finding that there was no bona fide dispute over the debt.

Perfect Image, Inc. v. M & M Electrical Constructors, Inc. · filed 1989-05-19

Perfect Image contends that there was no basis for an award of attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 because there was a bona fide dispute as to whether M & M had exceeded its general authorization to correct code violations and variances from the plans and specifications. ... Under the circumstances, the jury could reasonably have concluded that there was no bona fide controversy regarding whether Personal Image was indebted to M & M for payment of the account.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness when there is a bona fide controversy, even if the party opposing fees loses.

Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. v. Valentine Associates Ltd. · filed 1989-06-29

There was a bona fide controversy, although it was not resolved in Borg-Warner’s favor, and so an award of attorney fees would have been improper.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow attorney fees for bad faith when a bona fide dispute or reasonable defense exists.

EBCO GENERAL AGENCY v. Mitchell · filed 1988-04-05

Likewise, the court should have directed a verdict in appellants’ favor on the claim for attorney fees as an award of expenses of litigation under OCGA § 13-6-11. ... “Where, as here, there is as a matter of law a reasonable defense (see Division 1), attorney fees are not recoverable. [Cits.]”

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary expense when there is a bona fide controversy.

Manderson & Associates, Inc. v. Gore · filed 1989-11-17

Recovery of attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness and unnecessary expense is not authorized where there is a bona fide controversy. ... The trial court’s finding that Gore was not entitled to attorney fees, under OCGA § 13-6-11, and the findings of fact inherently contained therein, are not clearly erroneous.

Section 13-6-11 permits litigation expenses for bad faith in the underlying transaction despite a bona fide dispute over liability; such a dispute concerns only the stubborn litigiousness and unnecessary trouble and expense grounds.

Fidelity National Bank v. Kneller · filed 1989-11-22

A bona fide controversy within the contemplation of the code section pertains solely to the issue of stubborn litigiousness or causing the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense. Despite the existence of a bona fide controversy as to liability, a jury may find that defendant “acted in the most atrocious bad faith in his dealing with the plaintiff.”

Section 13-6-11 does not allow attorney’s fees for stubborn litigiousness when the parties have a bona fide controversy.

Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. v. Boat Trading, Inc. · filed 1989-12-05

Borg-Warner was entitled to litigate that vigorously disputed question without being subjected to the imposition of attorney’s fees simply because its efforts were ultimately unsuccessful. There being a bona fide controversy as to Boat Trading’s status as a purchaser in the ordinary course of business, an award of attorney’s fees is not authorized.

Section 13-6-11 does not support an award of litigation expenses when a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties.

Gunnin v. Parker · filed 1990-02-07

Where a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties, there is not “any evidence” to support an award for expenses of litigation.

Section 13-6-11 does not permit litigation expenses based on stubborn litigiousness when a bona fide controversy exists, including a dispute over part of a claim.

Candler v. Wickes Lumber Co. · filed 1990-03-16

Only stubborn litigiousness, and neither of the other two statutory grounds under OCGA § 13-6-11, i.e., bad faith nor unnecessary trouble and expense, formed the foundation for the award. Thus, if there were a bona fide controversy, then the trial court could not conclude that defendant was stubbornly litigious and awards for the expenses of litigation would be unjustified.

A bona fide controversy bars attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness under § 13-6-11, but does not bar fees supported by evidence of bad faith.

Myers v. Myers · filed 1990-05-04

No such restriction exists with regard to an award of attorney fees for bad faith. ... The award of attorney fees being supported by some evidence of bad faith, the trial court’s failure to charge on bona fide controversy was not error.

Section 13-6-11 allows attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or causing unnecessary trouble and expense, but a bona fide controversy bars recovery.

Ralston v. Etowah Bank · filed 1993-02-22

The basis for seeking recovery of attorney fees in this case was stubborn litigiousness, or the causing of unnecessary trouble and expense. OCGA § 13-6-11. Thus, the issue is whether a bona fide controversy existed between the parties. ... Since there was a bona fide controversy regarding the punitive damages sought by Mr. Carson throughout the litigation, recovery of attorney fees was not authorized, and the Bank’s motion for a directed verdict on this issue should have been granted.

A bona fide controversy does not prevent a jury from considering whether a party acted in bad faith under § 13-6-11.

First Union National Bank v. Davies-Elliott, Inc. · filed 1994-11-22

Even assuming, without deciding, that the existence of the prior appeal demonstrated a “bona fide controversy,” under OCGA § 13-6-11, that does not preclude the jury’s consideration of whether the Bank demonstrated “bad faith” in its dealings with Davies-Elliott, Inc.

A bona fide controversy does not defeat a claim for attorney fees under § 13-6-11 when bad faith is at issue.

Home Insurance v. Wynn · filed 1997-11-06

Contrary to her contention, the existence of a bona fide controversy will not defeat a claim for attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 when bad faith is an issue.

A bona fide controversy precludes attorney fees under § 13-6-11 based on stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary expense, even when the claimant prevails.

Smith v. Stuckey · filed 1998-06-08

“ ‘The existence of such a bona fide controversy would preclude a recovery of OCGA § 13-6-11 attorney’s fees on the theory that [Smith] had been stubbornly litigious or caused [the Stuckeys and Citizens] unnecessary expense, notwithstanding that the jury ultimately resolved the controversy in favor of [the Stuckeys and Citizens]. [Cits.]”’

When bad faith is not alleged, a bona fide controversy bars attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense; a damages award below the amount sought does not by itself establish such a controversy.

Morris v. SAVANNAH VALLEY REALTY, INC. · filed 1998-08-03

If bad faith is not an issue and the basis for attorney fees is either stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense, there is not any evidence to support an award pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 if a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties. ... While the disparity between the damages sought and those actually awarded may be some evidence of a bona fide controversy, it does not mandate a finding that there is a bona fide controversy.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow expenses of litigation for stubborn litigiousness when a bona fide controversy exists.

Homeland Communities, Inc. v. Rahall & Fryer, P. C. · filed 1998-11-23

A plaintiff may not recover expenses of litigation for stubborn litigiousness where a bona fide controversy exists.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) ... Further, the evidence did not establish that Homeland acted in a manner to warrant the imposition of attorney fees.

Section 13-6-11 permits a jury to award attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness when no bona fide controversy exists over the defendant’s obligation to pay.

Owens v. McGee & Oxford · filed 1999-05-26

In the present case, the jury was authorized to find that Owens failed to demonstrate that a bona fide controversy existed regarding her obligation to pay for the legal services rendered by plaintiff on her behalf. Therefore, the issue of attorney fees was properly presented to the jury.

When bad faith is not asserted, a bona fide controversy bars litigation expenses based on stubborn litigiousness or causing unnecessary trouble and expense.

Lamb v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Companies · filed 1999-09-16

Where bad faith is not at issue and the only asserted basis is either stubborn litigiousness or causing unnecessary trouble and expense, if a bona fide controversy is shown to exist, damages under OCGA § 13-6-11 cannot be awarded.

Section 13-6-11 permits a jury to award attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when there is no genuine dispute about liability.

Tattersall Club Corp. v. White · filed 1998-04-17

Absent a bona fide controversy, “that is, where there is no genuine dispute regarding the liability,” a jury may find stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense.

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees and litigation expenses when a bona fide, justiciable controversy exists.

Auto-Owners Insurance v. Crawford · filed 1999-11-09

When a bona fide, justiciable controversy exists, an award of attorney fees and expenses of litigation under OCGA § 13-6-11 is not authorized. ... Since a bona fide dispute was shown, the award of attorney fees cannot stand.

Section 13-6-11 does not permit attorney fees based on stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when a bona fide controversy exists between the parties.

Wynn v. Arias · filed 2000-03-10

Because there is a genuine dispute as to which party is responsible for breaching the construction contract, there is a genuine dispute over API’s duty to return the earnest money. Accordingly, API was entitled to ... summary judgment on Wynn’s claim for attorney fees and expenses under OCGA § 13-6-11.

A bona fide contract dispute precludes recovery of attorney fees under § 13-6-11.

Garrett v. Women's Health Care of Gwinnett, P.C. · filed 2000-03-24

But the contract did not define “gross profit,” and there was a bona fide controversy with respect to the method of calculation to be used. Such a bona fide controversy precludes a recovery of attorney fees.

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness when there is a bona fide controversy.

Perimeter Realty v. Gapi, Inc. · filed 2000-03-30

Recovery of attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness is not authorized where there is a bona fide controversy.

When a bona fide controversy exists, § 13-6-11 permits attorney fees only if the defendant acted in bad faith in the underlying transaction.

Physician Specialists in Anesthesia, P.C. v. MacNeill · filed 2000-09-13

That Code section permits a jury to award attorney fees “where the defendant has acted in bad faith, has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense.” If a bona fide controversy exists, attorney fees may be awarded only if the defendant has acted in bad faith in the underlying transaction.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow litigation expenses for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when a bona fide dispute over liability exists.

Driggers v. Campbell · filed 2000-12-13

Where, as here, a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties, there is no evidence to support an award for litigation expenses under OCGA § 13-6-11.

A bona fide controversy does not defeat a claim for attorney fees under § 13-6-11 based on bad faith; it matters to claims based on stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble or expense.

Centre Pointe Investments, Inc. v. Frank M. Darby Co. · filed 2001-05-14

As for Centre Pointe’s argument that there was a bona fide controversy, that issue is relevant only when a plaintiff seeks attorney fees because the defendant was stubbornly litigious or caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble or expense. It does not apply when the plaintiff alleges bad faith by the defendant.

Section 13-6-11 does not support an award of attorney fees or expenses when there is no evidence of bad faith and the parties have a bona fide controversy.

Baylis v. Atlanta Integrity Mortgage, Inc. · filed 2001-12-19

We agree that there was no basis for the award of attorney fees or expenses pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 because there was no evidence that Baylis acted in bad faith, and there was a bona fide controversy between the parties.

When a bona fide controversy exists, § 13-6-11 permits litigation expenses only if the defendant acted in bad faith in the underlying transaction.

GEORGIA NORTHEASTERN RAILROAD CO. v. Lusk · filed 2002-11-12

“Where a bona fide controversy exists, attorney’s fees may be awarded under OCGA § 13-6-11 only where the party sought to be charged has acted in bad faith in the underlying transaction.”

When a bona fide controversy exists, § 13-6-11 permits attorney fees only if the defendant acted in bad faith in the underlying transaction.

Gateway Bank & Trust v. Timms · filed 2003-01-24

“Where a bona fide controversy exists, attorney’s fees may be awarded under OCGA § 13-6-11 only where the party sought to be charged has acted in bad faith in the underlying transaction.” ... Contrary to the Bank’s contention, there is evidence that the Bank acted in bad faith when it failed to attempt to identify the trailer’s owner prior to seizing it.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees on a claim without a bona fide controversy even when a separate claim involves a genuine dispute.

4WD Parts Center, Inc. v. Mackendrick · filed 2003-03-18

With the evidence showing a genuine dispute, attorney fees were not authorized for prosecuting the breach of contract claim.... However, the evidence did authorize an award of attorney fees to Mackendrick for prosecuting the claim to recover for the loss of value to his vehicle. ... 4WD has failed to support its claim that a bona fide controversy existed between it and Mackendrick regarding the conversion claim. Because there was some evidence to support the trial court’s award of attorney fees, attorney fees related to that claim were authorized.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees when a defendant forces a plaintiff to sue despite the absence of a bona fide controversy, causing unnecessary trouble and expense.

White v. Plumbing Distributors, Inc. · filed 2003-06-27

Neither did the superior court err in awarding PDI attorney fees in this case pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11. That the Agreement was void and unenforceable was plain on its face, and the record is replete with evidence showing that PDI made this known to White prior to filing its lawsuit. ... The key to the test is whether there is a bona fide controversy. Where none exists, [as here,] forcing a plaintiff to resort to the courts in order to collect is plainly causing him to go to unnecessary trouble and expense.

When a bona fide controversy exists, § 13-6-11 permits attorney fees only if the defendant acted in bad faith in the underlying transaction.

ISS International Service Systems, Inc. v. Widmer · filed 2003-08-13

If a bona fide controversy exists, the plaintiff may recover attorney fees under this Code section only if the defendant has acted in bad faith in the underlying transaction. ... Pretermitting whether the evidence demanded a finding that a bona fide controversy existed as to ISS’s liability, we cannot say that no evidence was presented to show that ISS acted in bad faith in terminating Widmer and refusing to honor his agreement.

A bona fide controversy bars recovery of litigation expenses under § 13-6-11 unless the defendant acted in bad faith in the underlying transaction.

Grange Mutual Casualty Co. v. Kay · filed 2003-11-14

OCGA § 13-6-11 permits a plaintiff to recover attorney fees “where the defendant has acted in bad faith, has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense.” But where a bona fide controversy exists, a recovery under this Code section is impermissible unless there is evidence that the defendant has acted in bad faith in the underlying transaction. ... In this case, whether or not the agreement included medical expenses was a bona fide controversy. We affirm the denial of Kay’s motion on the issue of litigation expenses and remand for the entry of judgment in favor of GMCC on this issue.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees when there is no bona fide controversy over liability, even if damages are disputed.

Daniel v. Smith · filed 2004-03-04

Our research indicates that a jury may award attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 if there is no bona fide controversy as to liability, even if there is a bona fide controversy as to damages.

Section 13-6-11 does not permit attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness when a bona fide controversy exists and the defendant did not act in bad faith.

Nextel South Corp. v. R. A. Clark Consulting, Ltd. · filed 2004-03-04

In this case, Nextel prevailed on its breach of contract defense. Moreover, whether or not Clark was entitled to recover in quantum meruit was a bona fide controversy. The evidence does not establish that Nextel acted in bad faith or was stubbornly litigious. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s award of attorney fees.

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees for unnecessary trouble and expense when there is no bad faith and a bona fide controversy exists between the parties.

TSG Water Resources, Inc. v. D'Alba & Donovan Certified Public Accountants, P.C. · filed 2004-05-10

The record contains evidence showing that there is a bona fide controversy in this case, and thus, Plaintiffs are not entitled to attorneys fees based on unnecessary trouble and expense.

Section 13-6-11 does not permit attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when a bona fide controversy exists between the parties.

Marshall v. King & Morgenstern · filed 2005-02-21

When a bona fide controversy exists between the parties, a plaintiff cannot cite stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense as proper grounds for awarding attorney fees.

Section 13-6-11 does not permit attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when a bona fide controversy over liability exists and bad faith is not at issue.

Scully v. 1st Magnolia Homes, Inc. · filed 2005-08-04

“When bad faith is not an issue and the only asserted basis for a recovery of attorney fees is either stubborn litigiousness or the causing of unnecessary trouble and expense, there is not ‘any evidence’ to support an award pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 if a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties.” ... In light of this history, it is clear that a controversy existed as to liability, precluding a claim for attorney fees solely on grounds of stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense.

When bad faith is not at issue, § 13-6-11 does not permit litigation expenses if a bona fide dispute and reasonable defense exist.

Anderson v. Cayes · filed 2006-03-30

Here, the existence of a bona fide dispute and a reasonable defense at trial precludes the award of attorney fees and expenses of litigation under OCGA § 13-6-11.

When bad faith is not alleged, § 13-6-11 does not permit litigation expenses for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense if a bona fide dispute exists over liability.

White v. Scott · filed 2007-03-08

Here, as in Anderson, “the existence of a bona fide dispute and a reasonable defense at trial precludes the award of attorney fees and expenses of litigation under OCGA § 13-6-11.” Id. Because the trial court erred in submitting the issue of attorney fees and expenses of litigation to the jury, we must reverse the jury’s finding on that issue and vacate that portion of the final judgment awarding attorney fees and costs of litigation.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow attorney’s fees when a genuine dispute of law or fact exists between the parties.

Powell Company v. McGarey Group, LLC · filed 2007-03-28

If the evidence demonstrates that a genuine dispute exists, in law or fact, then the plaintiff cannot recover attorney’s fees under O.C.G.A. § 13—6— 11.

When a bona fide controversy exists, § 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees absent bad faith.

Davis v. Walker · filed 2007-11-21

But, in the event of a bona fide controversy, recovery of attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 is not authorized, absent a finding of bad faith.

When a bona fide controversy exists, § 13-6-11 permits litigation expenses only if the defendant acted in bad faith.

Merlino v. City of Atlanta · filed 2008-02-25

However, where, as here, a bona fide controversy exists as to whether the Julianos had the right to plug the pipe and whether the plugging of the pipe led to flooding on the Merlinos’ property, attorney fees may only be awarded under the statute where the defendant has acted in bad faith.

Section 13-6-11 permits litigation expenses for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when no bona fide dispute exists over the defendant’s liability.

Wilen v. Murray · filed 2008-06-18

A recovery for stubborn litigiousness or causing unnecessary trouble and expense is authorized if no bona fide controversy or dispute existed as to the defendant’s liability. ... Based upon the clear precedent that it is within the apparent authority of an attorney to hire an expert witness, ... we affirm the trial court’s conclusion that no bona fide controversy existed.

In the absence of bad faith, a bona fide controversy between the parties precludes an award of litigation expenses under § 13-6-11.

C & H DEVELOPMENT, LLC v. Franklin County · filed 2008-11-24

In the absence of bad faith, “there is not ‘any evidence’ to support an award pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 if a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties.” ... Although the underlying material facts are not in dispute, a bona fide controversy clearly existed between the County and C & H as to whether those facts demonstrated a violation of the Zoning Procedures Law, and the County’s defense to C & H’s zoning claim was, as a matter of law, reasonable.

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble when a bona fide controversy exists over a claimed breach of contract.

Bishop's Property & Investments, LLC v. Protective Life Insurance · filed 2009-02-06

However, because a bona fide controversy exists as to whether Defendant breached its promise to provide a refund of the unearned premium, attorneys’ fees are not authorized under O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11.

A bona fide dispute over liability precludes attorney fees under § 13-6-11 when bad faith is not at issue.

Lowery v. Roper · filed 2008-07-18

Thus, in the absence of an issue of Lowery’s bad faith, the Ropers were not entitled to attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 as a matter of law.

When bad faith is not alleged, § 13-6-11 permits litigation expenses only if there is no bona fide controversy.

Universal Underwriters Group v. Southern Guaranty Insurance Co. · filed 2009-04-22

Where, as here, the plaintiff does not allege bad faith, an award of litigation expenses is authorized only in the absence of a bona fide controversy. ... Based on the driver’s admission to acts in violation of this legal duty, the jury could have concluded that no bona fide controversy existed regarding Universal’s liability for the negligence per se of its driver.

When a bona fide controversy exists, § 13-6-11 permits attorney fees only upon a finding of bad faith.

Christie v. Rainmaster Irrigation, Inc. · filed 2009-07-10

Thus, in the absence of a finding of bad faith on Christie’s part, Rainmaster was not entitled to attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 as a matter of law.

In the absence of bad faith, § 13-6-11 does not authorize litigation expenses when a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties.

Memar v. Jebraeilli · filed 2010-04-07

Memar, however, has cited to no evidence showing that Jebraeilli acted in bad faith and, in the absence of bad faith, an award pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 is not authorized if a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties.

A bona fide controversy does not bar attorney fees under § 13-6-11 when bad faith is at issue.

Harris v. Tutt · filed 2010-10-07

But, even assuming that there did exist a genuine controversy about the amount of Tutt’s compensation, “the existence of a bona fide controversy will not defeat a claim for attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 when bad faith is an issue.”

When a bona fide controversy exists, § 13-6-11 permits an award of litigation expenses only if a party acted in bad faith.

Mayor of Savannah v. Batson-Cook Co. · filed 2011-05-11

However, if a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties, then an OCGA § 13-6-11 award is authorized only if a party has acted in bad faith.

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees when a genuine dispute exists over liability or damages.

Puckette v. John Bailey Pontiac-Buick-GMC Truck, Inc. · filed 2011-07-25

“Attorney fees are not authorized under OCGA § 13-6-11 if the evidence shows that a genuine dispute exists — whether of law or fact, on liability or amount of damages, or on any comparable issue.”

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize attorney fees when bad faith is not at issue and a genuine dispute exists over the amount of damages.

French v. Dilleshaw · filed 2012-02-01

We have explained before that, “in a case where bad faith is not an issue, attorney fees are not authorized under OCGA § 13-6-11 if the evidence shows that a genuine dispute exists — whether of law or fact, on liability or amount of damages, or on any comparable issue.” ... Consequently, the evidence does not support the award of attorney fees in this case, and that portion of the judgment must be reversed.

A bona fide dispute bars fees under § 13-6-11 for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense, but does not bar fees based on bad faith.

Durkin v. Platz · filed 2013-01-30

While the existence of a genuine dispute or a bona fide controversy precludes Plaintiffs from seeking an award of fees under O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11 on the grounds of stubborn litigiousness or causing Plaintiffs unnecessary trouble and expense, it does not foreclose an award of attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation based on bad faith.

A bona fide dispute over negligence liability precludes attorney fees under § 13-6-11 based on stubborn litigiousness.

Vol Repairs II Inc. v. Knighten · filed 2013-06-26

Given the record in this case, it is clear that there was a bona fide controversy regarding [Rodriguez’s] liability[] because the evidence did not demand a finding that [Rodriguez] was negligent [or] that his negligence was the sole cause of [Knighten’s] damages. Thus, . . . [Knighten was] not entitled to attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 as a matter of law. The trial court erred [by] denying [Rodriguez’s] motions for a directed verdict and j.n.o.v. on the issue of attorney fees.

A bona fide controversy bars fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense during litigation, but fees may remain available for the defendant’s conduct in the underlying transaction.

McGee v. Patterson · filed 2013-07-16

Because there is a bona fide controversy regarding the McGees’ remaining claims, they cannot recover under OCGA § 13-6-11 on the ground that the defendants were stubbornly litigious or caused unnecessary trouble and expense during the litigation. ... The McGees could potentially recover fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 based on the defendants’ actions in the underlying transaction.

When a bona fide controversy clearly exists, the defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on a claim for litigation expenses based on stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense.

Horton v. Dennis · filed 2013-11-21

It follows that, where a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties, the defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the plaintiff’s claim for attorney fees and expenses of litigation based on stubborn litigiousness or the causing of unnecessary trouble and expense.

A bona fide controversy does not bar an award of litigation expenses under § 13-6-11 when bad faith is at issue.

Paradise Lost, LLC v. Oglethorpe Power Corporation · filed 2015-07-08

But the existence of a bona fide controversy negates the possibility of a statutory award only “[w]here bad faith is not at issue.”

A bona fide controversy between the parties precludes attorney fees based on stubborn litigiousness under § 13-6-11.

Nash v. Reed · filed 2019-03-21

But the existence of a “bona fide controversy” between the parties precludes an award of attorney fees premised on stubborn litigiousness.

Bad faith in making or performing a contract can support attorney fees under § 13-6-11 even when a bona fide controversy exists.

Navicent Health, Inc. v. Fady S. Wanna · filed 2020-10-21

Consequently, Dr. Wanna’s assertion that bad faith attorney fees can never be awarded when there is a bona fide controversy is incorrect and provides no basis for reversal of the trial court’s summary judgment ruling.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow attorney fees for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when a bona fide controversy exists between the parties.

Copeland v. Home Grown Music, Inc. · filed 2021-03-16

Thus, despite the fact that the parties ultimately agreed to a consent order awarding Copeland the royalties on merchandise sales, there was, initially, a bona fide controversy between them, and, consequently, Copeland is not entitled to attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 as a matter of law.

Section 13-6-11 does not authorize litigation expenses for stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when a bona fide controversy exists over liability or damages.

REDMOND CONSTRUCTION, INC. v. WILSON · filed 2021-06-30

Based on the record in this case, the trial court was authorized to conclude that a bona fide controversy existed between the parties, thereby precluding an attorney fees award under OCGA § 13-6-11 for stubborn litigiousness or causing unnecessary trouble and expense.

A genuine dispute over liability bars litigation expenses based on stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense.

Woods v. Wal-Mart Transporation, LLC · filed 2022-03-11

However, the Court determines based on other evidence that there remains a genuine factual and legal dispute on the issue of liability. ... Accordingly, the Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the Plaintiff’s claim for litigation expenses under O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 precludes attorney fees based on stubborn litigiousness when the parties have a bona fide dispute of law or fact.

COLUMBIA COUNTY v. SATCHER · filed 2023-10-23

But the existence of a bona fide controversy between the parties, “whether of law or fact, on liability or amount of damages, or on any comparable issue,” precludes an award of attorney fees premised on stubborn litigiousness.

Section 13-6-11 does not permit litigation expenses based on stubborn litigiousness or unnecessary trouble and expense when a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties.

MENDOZA v. PHILLIPS · filed 2025-11-03

Where, as here, a bona fide controversy clearly exists between the parties, the defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the plaintiff’s claim for attorneys’ fees and expenses of litigation based on stubborn litigiousness or the causing of unnecessary trouble and expense.

Evidence that a defendant removed documents relevant to its liability may support an award of litigation expenses and attorney fees when the removal caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense.

Pulte Homes v. Simerly · filed 2013-07-08

In this case, the Plaintiffs sought expenses of litigation and attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 for stubborn litigiousness and unnecessary trouble and delay, and they argued that Carvalho’s testimony regarding spoilation was relevant to this issue. At trial, the Plaintiffs elicited Carvalho’s testimony about the May 2009 document review while he testified about the expenses of litigation and his attorney fees. If the documents removed by Pulte would show its liability, then the Plaintiffs were forced to undergo unnecessary trouble and expense to prosecute their claims in this case, and the evidence was properly admitted as it related to the issue of attorney fees.

Evidence of removed documents is admissible on a § 13-6-11 attorney-fee claim when it shows the plaintiff incurred unnecessary trouble and expense.

Pulte Home Corp. v. Simerly · filed 2013-07-08

In this case, the Plaintiffs sought expenses of litigation and attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11 for stubborn litigiousness and unnecessary trouble and delay, and they argued that Carvalho’s testimony regarding spoliation was relevant to this issue. ... If the documents removed by Pulte would show its liability, then the Plaintiffs were forced to undergo unnecessary trouble and expense to prosecute their claims in this case, and the evidence was properly admitted as it related to the issue of attorney fees.

Section 13-6-11 allows a jury to award litigation expenses when the defendant acted in bad faith, was stubbornly litigious, or caused unnecessary trouble and expense; proof of any one ground suffices.

Jackson v. Brinegar, Inc. · filed 1983-02-15

We note under Code Ann. § 20-1404 (now OCGA § 13-6-11, effective November 1,1982) expenses of litigation are generally not allowed as a part of damages, but if the defendant has acted in bad faith, has been stubbornly litigious or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expenses the jury may allow them. ... For the plaintiff to recover it need only show any one of the three conditions to exist.

Section 13-6-11 permits litigation expenses when the defendant acted in bad faith, but the amount awarded must be supported by evidence.

Wahnschaff Corp. v. O. E. Clark Paper Box Co. · filed 1983-04-07

An award of litigation expenses is allowed under OCGA § 13-6-11 (formerly Code Ann. § 20-1404) upon a finding of bad faith on the part of the defendant, which the trial court so found in the case sub judice. This finding is supported by the evidence and therefore the award was permissible. However, no evidence was presented as to the amount of the litigation expenses incurred. Therefore the amount of the award is not supported by the record.

Section 13-6-11 permits a jury to award specially pleaded litigation expenses when the plaintiff shows bad faith, stubborn litigiousness, or unnecessary trouble and expense.

Thompson Enterprises Inc. v. Coskrey · filed 1983-09-08

OCGA § 13-6-11 (Code Ann. § 20-1404) disallows these expenses as a general rule but provides that “the jury may allow” them “where the plaintiff has specially pleaded and has made prayer therefor and where the defendant has acted in bad faith in making the contract, has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense.” ... The record reveals that appellees produced at trial at least some evidence that would support a finding of conduct amounting to bad faith on appellant’s part, as well as of the other two statutory conditions. ... The court below did not err in instructing the jury on the issue of expenses of litigation.

Entitlement to litigation expenses under § 13-6-11 is for a jury to decide, so the court may not award them on summary judgment.

Joseph Camacho Associates, Inc. v. Millard · filed 1984-02-23

The trial court erred by awarding expenses of litigation to appellee on his motion for summary judgment.

Section 13-6-11 permits a jury to award litigation expenses if the defendant acted in bad faith, was stubbornly litigious, or caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense.

Lindsey v. Heard Oil Co. · filed 1984-03-14

The expenses of litigation are not generally allowed as a part of the damages; but if the defendant has acted in bad faith, or has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense, the jury may allow them. OCGA § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 authorizes litigation expenses when a defendant refuses to respond to a claim and sends payment that would extinguish a remaining injury claim.

U-Haul of Western Ga. v. Ford · filed 1984-07-12

Contrary to U-Haul’s contention, the claim was authorized under OCGA § 13-6-11 (Code Ann. § 20-1404) and is not based on U-Haul’s failure to pay a specific sum in settlement. The basis for the claim was U-Haul’s refusal to return telephone calls or respond to a letter from plaintiff’s attorney, and sending a check for property damages that would have extinguished Mrs. Ford’s remaining claim for injuries.

Section 13-6-11 leaves the question of litigation expenses for stubborn litigiousness to the jury.

J. M. Clayton Co. v. Martin · filed 1985-11-12

Appellee alleged stubborn litigiousness on the part of appellant and sought award of attorney fees and the expenses of litigation in each count. See OCGA § 13-6-11. Appellant now questions the trial court’s denial of its motion for summary judgment on the issue of the attorney fees and litigation expenses. However, “[t]he intent of the law ... is to leave the matter of expenses ... to the jury trying the case. [Cit.]” Brannon Enterprises v. Deaton, 159 Ga. App. 685, 687 (285 SE2d 58) (1981). The trial court did not err in denying summary judgment to appellant on this issue.

Section 13-6-11 permits an award of litigation expenses even when the jury denies interest and rental damages.

Hunnicutt v. Hunnicutt · filed 1987-04-09

It is not patently inconsistent to assess the expenses of litigation for bad faith, stubborn litigiousness, or unnecessary trouble and expense, while at the same time denying interest on money, or rental on property, to which money and property plaintiff had been entitled earlier.

Section 13-6-11 allows recovery of litigation expenses only upon a showing of bad faith, stubborn litigiousness, or unnecessary trouble or expense.

S & W Mechanical Co., Inc. v. City of Homerville · filed 1988-03-23

That section provides for the recovery of the expenses of litigation only if plaintiff can establish bad faith, stubborn litigiousness, or unnecessary trouble or expense.

Section 13-6-11 permits recovery of litigation expenses only when they arise from the present action.

Easley v. Clement · filed 1988-06-09

Since the recovery of such expenses of litigation pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 may not be had where such expenses do not arise out of the present action, the trial court properly [granted summary judgment to appellee on this count].

Section 13-6-11 permits recovery of specially pleaded litigation expenses when the opposing party acted in bad faith in making the contract, was stubbornly litigious, or caused unnecessary trouble and expense.

Doughty v. Simpson · filed 1989-02-16

Expenses of litigation generally are not recoverable, unless specially pleaded, as in the instant case, and the other litigant has acted in bad faith in making the contract, has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the prevailing party unnecessary trouble and expense.

Section 13-6-11 allows expenses for prosecuting an independent abusive litigation counterclaim, but not for defending the underlying claim.

Vogtle v. Coleman · filed 1989-03-02

Under the decisions cited above, then the Yost plaintiff may seek OCGA § 13-6-11 damages for bringing his independent Yost counterclaim. ... It follows then that the trial court correctly allowed Coleman these expenses for prosecuting his Yost claim, but not for having to defend the underlying counterclaim against him by Vogtle.

Section 13-6-11 did not authorize the attorney-fee award as expenses of litigation in this case.

Georgia Society of Plastic Surgeons, Inc. v. Anderson · filed 1987-12-04

In addition, the jury awarded attorney fees of $140,000 as damages for the unfair trade practices and also as expenses of litigation under OCGA § 13-6-11. ... We find that the award was not authorized on any of the three bases found by the jury and the trial court. We therefore reverse the award of attorney fees.

Attorney fees specially pleaded and prayed for under § 13-6-11 are actual damages that can support a punitive damages award.

Privitera v. Addison · filed 1989-01-03

Though Roberson’s award of indemnification on her guarantee be stricken, and though Sandhoff was released from his guarantee and awarded “zero dollars” in indemnification, the “specially pleaded” and prayed-for award of attorney fees in the case of both Roberson and Sandhoff constitute actual damages under the express terms of OCGA § 13-6-11. In point of fact, they are actual damages. Therefore, these awards of attorney fees support the awards of punitive damages to Roberson and Sandhoff.

Section 13-6-11 permits recovery of litigation expenses only when other damages are recoverable.

Connell v. Houser · filed 1988-11-04

Expenses of litigation are not recoverable pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 unless other elements of damages are recoverable.

Section 13-6-11 permits recovery of reasonable in-house litigation costs when the defendant’s bad faith forced the plaintiff to sue.

Salsbury Laboratories, Inc. v. Merieux Laboratories, Inc. · filed 1989-06-26

Although the court finds that Salsbury’s “in-house” costs of litigation are recoverable under section 13-6-11, the court agrees with the Defendants that the amount sought by Salsbury is somewhat unreasonable.

Section 13-6-11 permits an award of litigation expenses when the plaintiff shows bad faith, stubborn litigiousness, or unnecessary trouble or expense; proof of any one ground is enough.

Parking Co. of America v. Sucan · filed 1990-05-14

Although we agree that defendant never denied responsibility, the claim for expenses of litigation was based on its failure to settle with Sucan while at the same time assuring him that the repairs to his car would be taken care of. Under OCGA § 13-6-11 expenses of litigation may be awarded if the plaintiff shows that the defendant acted in bad faith, or was stubbornly litigious, or put the plaintiff to unnecessary trouble or expense. ... Employing the any evidence standard of review, we conclude that the trial court did not err here in awarding attorney fees to Sucan.

Section 13-6-11 permits a jury to award litigation expenses and attorney fees when there is no bona fide controversy.

Callahan v. Panfel · filed 1990-06-12

The trial court similarly did not err in allowing the jury to consider evidence of the appellees’ litigation expenses and attorney fees and in allowing their claim for such expenses and fees to go to the jury. See generally OCGA § 13-6-11. ... Under the circumstances, the jury was authorized to determine that there had been no bona fide controversy concerning the appellees’ entitlement to the return of the money.

Section 13-6-11 allows litigation expenses only when they are specially pleaded and prayed for, the defendant acted in bad faith, was stubbornly litigious, or caused unnecessary trouble and expense, and other elements of damages are recoverable.

Barnett v. Morrow · filed 1990-06-21

OCGA § 13-6-11 states that expenses of litigation generally shall not be allowed as a part of the damages, but may be allowed where specially pleaded and prayed for and where defendant has acted in bad faith in making the contract, has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense. They are ancillary and recoverable only in cases where other elements of damages are recoverable. ... There is no authority for the proposition that merely seeking equitable relief, which for whatever reason is unobtainable, entitles one to recovery under OCGA § 13-6-11. ... Because the correct principle is that plaintiffs must prevail on their basic cause of action in order to obtain litigation expenses, it was error to award attorney fees based upon the mooted specific performance count.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees when the defendant acts in bad faith, is stubbornly litigious, or causes the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense arising from the underlying transaction.

Stone v. King · filed 1990-07-03

OCGA § 13-6-11, which permits an award of attorney fees “where the defendant has acted in bad faith, has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense,” has been held to apply to conduct “arising] from the transaction underlying the cause of action in litigation. [Cits.]” ... If appellee had filed suit solely to enforce the settlement contract, attorney fees would have been recoverable under OCGA § 13-6-11 upon proper proof. ... Given, however, that appellee’s efforts to enforce the settlement agreement occurred during a pre-existing lawsuit, this conduct arose during the litigation, not as part of the underlying transaction.

Section 13-6-11 permits a jury to award litigation expenses when the defendant acted in bad faith, was stubbornly litigious, or caused unnecessary trouble and expense.

Wisenbaker v. Warren · filed 1990-07-12

OCGA § 13-6-11 authorizes the jury to award expenses of litigation “where the defendant has acted in bad faith, has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense.”

Section 13-6-11 permits recovery of litigation expenses, including in-house non-attorney personnel time spent solely because of the litigation, when its statutory requirements are met.

Salsbury Laboratories, Inc. v. Merieux Laboratories, Inc., Donald G. Hildebrand, Jack R. Berg · filed 1990-07-24

The statute speaks in terms of “expenses of litigation.” This is a broad term which, so far as we have been informed by appellants, has not been defined or narrowed by Georgia courts. We, therefore, do not find clearly erroneous the trial court’s finding that the time spent by its in-house non-attorney personnel was spent solely because of this litigation. We thus hold that it was an “expense of litigation” under Georgia law.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees when a defendant forces a plaintiff to incur unnecessary trouble and expense to collect.

Clements v. Barnes · filed 1990-09-04

The trial court similarly did not err in denying the appellant’s motion for a directed verdict with respect to the appellees’ claim for attorney fees pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11. “Where no defense exists, as in this case, forcing a plaintiff to resort to the courts in order to collect is plainly causing him ‘unnecessary trouble and expense.’ [Cits.]”

Section 13-6-11 permits recovery of litigation expenses when the opposing party acts in bad faith or is stubbornly litigious.

Carter v. Allstate Insurance · filed 1990-10-30

Accordingly, there being no suggestion of any bad faith on the part of Allstate in connection with this matter, we hold that the trial court erred in denying Allstate’s motion for summary judgment with respect to the plaintiffs’ claim for litigation expenses based on bad faith and stubborn litigiousness. ... See generally OCGA § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 allows litigation expenses as an additional element of damages when specially pleaded and one statutory condition is shown, with bad faith in a tort case tied to the transaction causing the claim.

Brown v. Baker · filed 1990-11-05

Contrary to appellee’s contentions, OCGA § 13-6-11 does not create an independent cause of action. That statute merely establishes the circumstances in which a plaintiff may recover the expenses of litigation as an additional element of his damages.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees when there is evidence supporting the award and no reasonable defense to the claim.

Gist v. Ferguson Construction Co. · filed 1990-11-19

“[A]n award of attorney fees made pursuant to [OCGA § 13-6-11] ‘should be affirmed if there is any evidence to support it unless it can be said as a matter of law that there was a reasonable defense.’ [Cits.]”

Section 13-6-11 requires evidence that litigation expenses were reasonably incurred before an award may be made.

Great American Insurance v. International Insurance · filed 1990-12-10

IIC has asked that upon a finding of bad faith, the court award it litigation expenses pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11. Before such an award can be made under O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11, however, the requesting party must provide the court with evidence which demonstrates the expenses submitted were reasonably incurred. Eways v. Georgia R.R. Bank, 806 F.2d 991 (11th Cir.1986). Furthermore, “hours attorneys spend on a case must be documented in order to sustain an award of attorneys’ fees authorized by statute.” Sweeney v. Athens Regional Medical Center, 917 F.2d 1560, 1571 (11th Cir.1990). The current data IIC has furnished the court in support of its request for litigation expenses, a one page summary listing its estimated total expense of litigation, is not sufficient evidence upon which the court can determine whether or not IIC is entitled to litigation expenses. Therefore, the court will defer its ruling on litigation expenses until a later date.

Section 13-6-11 permits litigation expenses on summary judgment only when the movant establishes entitlement as a matter of law, including stubborn litigiousness and the reasonable value of professional services.

Rivergate Corporation v. Bccp Enterprises, Inc. · filed 1991-02-14

Expenses of litigation under OCGA § 13-6-11 can be awarded on summary judgment, but the movant must be entitled to them as a matter of law. ... As it applies to this case, then, the record must show that defendant was stubbornly litigious as a matter of law. ... This it does not do. ... Even assuming that it showed such actions on the part of defendant so that the court was stating an undisputed fact rather than making a finding of fact, the second fact which the movant must show is the reasonable value of the professional services which underlies the claim for attorney fees. ... There is no evidence in the record supporting the court’s award, either as to amount or as to its reasonableness. ... Thus the grant of summary judgment to plaintiff on the issues related to the OCGA § 13-6-11 claim must be reversed.

Section 13-6-11 does not support attorney fees when bad faith is unavailable and a bona fide controversy exists between the parties.

Read v. Benedict · filed 1991-05-13

“When bad faith is not an issue and the only asserted basis for a recovery of attorney fees is either stubborn litigiousness or the causing of unnecessary trouble and expense, there is not ‘any evidence’ to support an award pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 . . . if a bona fide controversy . . . exists between the parties.” ... As a bona fide controversy did exist, the trial court did not err in awarding j.n.o.v. to appellee as to this matter.

Section 13-6-11 authorizes litigation expenses when at least one statutory condition exists, and bad faith means bad faith in the underlying transaction rather than refusal to pay.

Fine & Block v. Evans · filed 1991-09-09

While it is only necessary to show the existence of one of the statutory conditions of this section in order to authorize an award of damages for expenses of litigation (Gordon v. Ogden, 154 Ga. App. 641 (2) (269 SE2d 499)), Judge Eldridge found that all three were present in the underlying lease contract case. Such findings by a trial court, sitting as trier of fact, must be upheld if supported by any evidence. In the underlying lease contract case, the award of expenses would have been approved on the basis of at least one of the statutory conditions. For example, the bad faith referred to in OCGA § 13-6-11 is not bad faith in refusing to pay but bad faith in the transaction out of which the cause of action arises.

Section 13-6-11 permits additional damages for expenses of litigation only when other elements of damages are recoverable.

Lincoln National Life Insurance v. Davenport · filed 1991-09-10

Additional damages to compensate plaintiff for expenses of litigation are not recoverable pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11 unless other elements of damages are recoverable.

Section 13-6-11 permits attorney fees as damages when the plaintiff specially pleads and prays for them based on bad faith, stubborn litigiousness, or unnecessary trouble and expense.

Eastern Foods, Inc. v. Forman · filed 1991-12-05

The award of attorney fees was not authorized by OCGA § 13-6-11.

Section 13-6-11 does not allow a defendant to recover attorney’s fees and litigation expenses based only on the plaintiff’s alleged bad faith when the defendant lacks a viable independent counterclaim.

White v. Lance H. Herndon, Inc. · filed 1992-01-01

Appellant was not entitled to any recovery under OCGA § 13-6-11 based upon appellee’s alleged “bad faith” in prosecution of the instant action.

Section 13-6-11 allows a jury to award litigation expenses when properly pleaded and the defendant acted in bad faith, was stubbornly litigious, or caused unnecessary trouble and expense.

Trust Co. Bank of Middle Georgia, N. A. v. Stubbs · filed 1992-03-10

Plaintiffs next contend the trial court erroneously granted the bank summary judgment on their claims for attorney fees pursuant to OCGA § 13-6-11. That statute provides “[t]he expenses of litigation generally shall not be allowed as a part of the damages; but where the plaintiff has specially pleaded and has made prayer therefor and where the defendant has acted in bad faith in making the contract, has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense, the jury may allow them.” As discussed, supra, the trial court correctly concluded the bank is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the fraud claims. ... There are no other allegations which would justify the imposition of attorney fees in this case. The trial court properly granted the bank summary judgment on this claim.

Section 13-6-11 permits expenses of litigation when bad faith, stubborn litigiousness, or unnecessary expense is shown, but a bona fide controversy bars the award.

McDevitt & Street Co. v. K-C Air Conditioning Service, Inc. · filed 1992-03-18

The trial court erred in directing a verdict with respect to plaintiff’s claim for expenses of litigation under OCGA § 13-6-11. Mere refusal to pay a disputed claim without suit is not sufficient to support an award of expenses of litigation, nor are they authorized where a bona fide controversy exists. However, “[questions of bad faith, stubborn litigiousness, and unnecessary expense, under OCGA § 13-6-11, are generally questions for the factfinder. [Cit.] ” Manderson & Assoc. v. Gore, 193 Ga. App. 723, 735 (9) (389 SE2d 251) (1989). It was for the jury to determine whether there was a bona fide controversy in this case.