Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Oliff v. Smith
Citations: 214 Ga. App. 358; 447 S.E.2d 707; 94 Fulton County D. Rep. 2725; 1994 Ga. App. LEXIS 907Docket: A94A1212
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia; August 2, 1994; Georgia; State Appellate Court
Debra Oliff appeals the trial court's order dismissing her complaint due to failure to respond to discovery requests. Defendants served Oliff with interrogatories and document requests on February 27, 1992. After a series of communications, including a letter from defendants on May 6, 1992, and a re-service of the requests on June 10, 1992, Oliff acknowledged receipt on June 15, 1992, promising responses within ten days. Discovery was subsequently extended to November 1, 1992. However, when defendants filed a motion to dismiss on November 20, 1992, Oliff had not responded. Oliff eventually served her responses and filed a response to the motion to dismiss on December 21, 1992, just before a scheduled pre-trial conference. The trial court found that only one set of her responses was verified and deemed her explanation for the delay—being "out-of-pocket"—insufficient. The court ruled that a hearing was not necessary, as established by prior case law, allowing the court to determine wilfulness based on the record. Oliff's late provision of discovery responses did not prevent dismissal, consistent with case precedents. The appellate court upheld the trial court’s decision, affirming the dismissal based on a lack of timely compliance with discovery obligations and finding no abuse of discretion in the trial court's judgment. Appellees' motion for penalties under Court of Appeals Rule 26(b) was denied. The judgment was affirmed, with both judges concurring.