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.
Warehouse Home Furnishings Distributors, Inc. v. Davenport
Citations: 199 Ga. App. 33; 403 S.E.2d 850; 1991 Ga. App. LEXIS 331Docket: A90A2107
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia; February 26, 1991; Georgia; State Appellate Court
Jim Davenport filed a lawsuit in Georgia against his former employer, Warehouse Home Furnishings Distributors, Inc., seeking recovery of a bonus he claimed was owed. Warehouse scheduled a deposition for Davenport in Georgia. At the time of the deposition, Davenport was a Texas resident, having previously lived in Dublin, Georgia, where he was employed. He objected to the deposition location, filing a motion for a protective order, which the trial court granted. The court certified the order for immediate review, leading to Warehouse’s interlocutory appeal. The central issue in the appeal is whether a nonresident plaintiff can be compelled to give a deposition in Georgia, the forum state. Under OCGA § 9-11-45(b), a person may be required to attend a deposition in the county of their residence, employment, or business transactions, or within 30 miles of the county seat of such locations. The court referenced Blanton v. Blanton, where the Georgia Supreme Court declined to compel an out-of-state defendant to attend a deposition, affirming that the statute is designed to protect all individuals giving depositions, contrasting it with the narrower federal rule. Despite acknowledging that the statute's interpretation may impose stringent limits on discovery, the court felt compelled by both the statute's language and the precedent set in Blanton to uphold the trial court's ruling. The judgment was affirmed with judges McMurray and Carley concurring.