FARRAR
v.
MACIE et al.
A09A0103.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
March 30, 2009
ADAMS, Judge.
Psychologist John Edward Farrar sued attorney James J. Macie, Macie's wife, Mary Ann Macie, and Macie's paralegal, Marsha Dryden, seeking damages arising out of the alleged tortious interference by the defendants with Farrar's business relations, contracts, trade and profession. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants, and Farrar appeals. We affirm because Macie is immune from civil liability for his communication to the State Board of Examiners of Psychologists ("State Board") and because the defendants showed a lack of evidence as to Farrar's claim that they distributed a flyer which harmed Farrar's business.
To prevail at summary judgment under OCGA § 9-11-56, the moving party must demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the undisputed facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, warrant judgment as a matter of law. OCGA § 9-11-56 (c). A defendant may do this by showing the court that the documents, affidavits, depositions and other evidence in the record reveal that there is no evidence sufficient to create a jury issue on at least one essential element of plaintiff's case.
(Emphasis omitted.) Lau's Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491 (405 SE2d 474) (1991). We review an appeal from a grant of summary judgment de novo, and we view the evidence, and all reasonable conclusions and inferences drawn from it, in the light most favorable to the nonmovant. See Costrini v. Hansen Architects, P.C., 247 Ga. App. 136 (543 SE2d 760) (2000).
So viewed, the evidence shows that Macie often encountered Farrar as a testifying expert in child custody cases. On December 15, 2000, Macie wrote to the State Board concerning three cases in which Farrar had given testimony. Dryden typed the letter, but neither Dryden nor Mary Ann Macie were involved in composing the correspondence. The State Board investigated Farrar and issued a final decision on October 16, 2003. The State Board found Farrar had violated its rules and ordered that he suspend all testimony in custody and certain other cases for a minimum of one year beginning November 1, 2003.(fn1) Farrar filed this action on November 16, 2006, seeking damages arising out of Macie's filing of complaints with the State Board and the alleged dissemination of a publication by the defendants in February of 2003.
1. Although not separately enumerated as error, Farrar complains that the trial court referred to depositions that were not on file at the time of the trial court's order. In their motion for summary judgment, defendants referred to numerous exhibits, including transcripts of Farrar's deposition. As supplemented, the record shows that these exhibits, including copies of the deposition transcripts, were filed with the trial court. The trial court was entitled to rely thereon. See Village Auto Ins. Co. v. Rush, 286 Ga. App. 688, 693 (5) (649 SE2d 862) (2007); Jacobsen v. Muller, 181 Ga. App. 382, 383 (3) (352 SE2d 604) (1986).
2. Farrar claims that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to defendants on his claim supported by the affidavit of Marcus L. Pittman, Jr. We disagree.
Farrar contends that in February of 2003, the defendants distributed anonymous flyers in the community alleging that Farrar was subject to prosecution by the Attorney General of the State of Georgia. In support of their motion for summary judgment, defendants averred that they did not author, publish, or distribute such a document. In opposition to the defendants' motion for summary judgment, Farrar filed Pittman's affidavit.
Pittman, a "forensic questioned document examiner," averred, based on certain documents provided to him, that Dryden and Mary Ann Macie authored certain other documents or "flyers" provided to him. However, these various documents, specifically exhibits "B" through "E," were not attached to the affidavit filed with the trial court, and the trial court found the affidavit to be insufficient. Without the attachments, Pittman's affidavit did not show either what Dryden and Mary Ann Macie had purportedly authored or what Pittman relied upon to come to that conclusion. Furthermore, for purposes of affidavits supporting or opposing summary judgment, "[s]worn or certified copies of all papers or parts thereof referred to in an affidavit shall be attached thereto or served therewith." OCGA § 9-11-56 (e). The trial court correctly refused to consider Pittman's affidavit. See Mingledolph v. University Emergency Physicians, P.C., 174 Ga. App. 75, 75-76 (329 SE2d 222) (1985); Gunnin v. Swat, Inc., 195 Ga. App. 344, 345 (393 SE2d 700) (1990).
In view of the foregoing, Farrar presented no admissible evidence connecting the defendants with the anonymous flyers. As to Dryden and Marie Ann Macie, who did not file the complaint with the Board, Farrar's failure to connect them with the flyers entitled them to summary judgment on all of Farrar's claims.(fn2)
3. The trial court found that Farrar could not recover for Macie's alleged action in reporting Farrar to the State Board because Macie's statements were privileged.(fn3) Farrar contends that the trial court erred because its finding was not supported by undisputed facts. We disagree.
The State Board is responsible for issuing licenses to practice psychology. See OCGA § 43-39-1 et seq. OCGA § 43-1-19 (a) provides that a professional licensing board may refuse to grant a license, revoke a license, or discipline a licensee if, among other things, the applicant or licensee "[e]ngaged in any unprofessional, immoral, unethical, deceptive, or deleterious conduct or practice harmful to the public, which conduct or practice materially affects the fitness of the licensee or applicant to practice a business or profession licensed under this title." OCGA § 43-1-19 (a) (6). OCGA § 43-1-19 (i) provides that a person is immune from civil or criminal liability
for reporting or investigating the acts or omissions of a licensee or applicant which violate the provisions of subsection (a) of this Code section . . . if such report is made or action is taken in good faith, without fraud or malice.
Macie's complaint to the State Board alleged that Farrar had engaged in conduct which violated several ethical standards and guidelines of the American Psychological Association. For purposes of OCGA § 43-1-19 (a) (6), unprofessional conduct subject to discipline includes "any departure from, or the failure to conform to, the minimal reasonable standards of acceptable and prevailing practice of the business or profession licensed under this title." Pretermitting whether Macie's actions may also be privileged on other grounds, in light of OCGA § 43-1-19 (i), Macie was immune from civil liability for reporting Farrar's alleged unethical and unprofessional conduct to the State Board so long as Macie's report was made "in good faith, without fraud or malice." See generally Bell v. Sasser, 238 Ga. App. 843, 853 (3) (520 SE2d 287) (1999) ("the undertaking of a legally privileged act . . . cannot support a tortious interference claim").
Macie averred that he filed the report because "I became concerned that Dr. Farrar often made custody recommendations without a proper evaluation of both parents, the children, and relevant witnesses." The affidavit further shows that Macie spoke to psychologists and read the American Psychological Association Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Divorce Proceedings, and became "worried that Dr. Farrar's custody recommendations violated the APA Guidelines and were improper, to the detriment of the children involved in cases in which he testified."
Macie's sworn testimony evidences his good faith in filing the complaint with the State Board. See Smith v. Henry, 276 Ga. App. 831, 832 (625 SE2d 93) (2005) (defendant's affidavit showing the basis for his comments at a Board of Commissioner's meeting established his good faith). "In such posture [Farrar] cannot rest upon his allegations or denials but is cast with the burden [of] showing there was a genuine issue for trial." Cohen v. Hartlage, 179 Ga. App. 847, 849 (348 SE2d 331) (1986). Farrar does not argue that anything in the record either shows or reasonably infers that Macie did not act in good faith in communicating with the State Board. It follows that summary judgment was properly granted to Macie on all claims arising from that communication. See Brewer v. Schacht, 235 Ga. App. 313, 317-318 (4) (b) (509 SE2d 378) (1998); Sparks v. Parks, 172 Ga. App. 823, 826-827 (2) (324 SE2d 784) (1984).
4. Farrar also contends that the trial court erred in finding that his claims against Macie were barred by the statute of limitations and that there were no justiciable issues of law or fact with respect to his claim for tortious interference with contract. In view of our findings in Divisions 2 and 3, these claims of error are moot.
Judgment affirmed.
Blackburn, P.J., and Doyle, J., concur.Savannah GA Divorce Lawyer
GA Uncontested Divorce - Georgia Contested Divorce -
We specialize in: Georgia Separation Agreements - Spousal Support - Property Division - Alimony - Military Divorce - Contempt Actions in Divorce Cases, Uncontested Divorce, Savannah Georgia Noncontested divorce - Child Custody Attorney / Custody modification - Child Support Modification - Child Visitation
Savannah GA, Richmond Hill, GA, Fort Stewart, Hinesville, Georgia Family Law Lawyer
Friday, August 14, 2009
Divorce Attorney Savannah GA - Bifurcated Divorce
A definition for Bifurcated Divorce in Georgia
A bifurcated divorce is one in which the marriage between spouses is terminated, but other issues, such as the division of property, alimony, child support or custody arrangements, are left to be determined at a later date or at trial. It is often used when one of the spouses wishes to remarry, but resolve other issues in the future. It is also referred to as a divisible divorce.
Savannah GA Divorce Lawyer
GA Uncontested Divorce - Georgia Contested Divorce -
We specialize in: Georgia Separation Agreements - Spousal Support - Property Division - Alimony - Military Divorce - Contempt Actions in Divorce Cases, Uncontested Divorce, Savannah Georgia Noncontested divorce - Child Custody Attorney / Custody modification - Child Support Modification - Child Visitation
Savannah GA, Richmond Hill, GA, Fort Stewart, Hinesville, Georgia Family Law Lawyer
A bifurcated divorce is one in which the marriage between spouses is terminated, but other issues, such as the division of property, alimony, child support or custody arrangements, are left to be determined at a later date or at trial. It is often used when one of the spouses wishes to remarry, but resolve other issues in the future. It is also referred to as a divisible divorce.
Savannah GA Divorce Lawyer
GA Uncontested Divorce - Georgia Contested Divorce -
We specialize in: Georgia Separation Agreements - Spousal Support - Property Division - Alimony - Military Divorce - Contempt Actions in Divorce Cases, Uncontested Divorce, Savannah Georgia Noncontested divorce - Child Custody Attorney / Custody modification - Child Support Modification - Child Visitation
Savannah GA, Richmond Hill, GA, Fort Stewart, Hinesville, Georgia Family Law Lawyer
Divorce Lawyer Savannah Georgia - Bed and Board Divorce
A definition for Bed and Board Divorce in Georgia
A bed and board divorce means that the husband and wife are officially separated and neither can marry another person. It is a qualified or partial divorce based upon fault, usually desertion or cruelty, as defined by state laws, which vary by state. It is sometimes brought by an injured spouse to get the court to order the other spouse out of the residence.
Savannah GA Divorce Lawyer
GA Uncontested Divorce - Georgia Contested Divorce -
We specialize in: Georgia Separation Agreements - Spousal Support - Property Division - Alimony - Military Divorce - Contempt Actions in Divorce Cases, Uncontested Divorce, Savannah Georgia Noncontested divorce - Child Custody Attorney / Custody modification - Child Support Modification - Child Visitation
Savannah GA, Richmond Hill, GA, Fort Stewart, Hinesville, Georgia Family Law Lawyer
A bed and board divorce means that the husband and wife are officially separated and neither can marry another person. It is a qualified or partial divorce based upon fault, usually desertion or cruelty, as defined by state laws, which vary by state. It is sometimes brought by an injured spouse to get the court to order the other spouse out of the residence.
Savannah GA Divorce Lawyer
GA Uncontested Divorce - Georgia Contested Divorce -
We specialize in: Georgia Separation Agreements - Spousal Support - Property Division - Alimony - Military Divorce - Contempt Actions in Divorce Cases, Uncontested Divorce, Savannah Georgia Noncontested divorce - Child Custody Attorney / Custody modification - Child Support Modification - Child Visitation
Savannah GA, Richmond Hill, GA, Fort Stewart, Hinesville, Georgia Family Law Lawyer
Savannah GA Divorce Lawyer - Adversarial Divorce in Georgia
A definition for Adversarial Divorce in Georgia
In adversarial divorces, the parties are adversarial and unable to agree on the terms of divorce. Common areas of disagreement include, but are not limited to: grounds for divorce, custody of the children, visitation rights, division of the assets of the marriage, child support, maintenance (alimony), payment of family debts, contribution toward educational expenses (college or parochial), payment of health insurance for the dependent spouse, income tax structuring, etc. It is also referred to as a contested divorce.
Savannah GA Divorce Lawyer
GA Uncontested Divorce - Georgia Contested Divorce -
We specialize in: Georgia Separation Agreements - Spousal Support - Property Division - Alimony - Military Divorce - Contempt Actions in Divorce Cases, Uncontested Divorce, Savannah Georgia Noncontested divorce - Child Custody Attorney / Custody modification - Child Support Modification - Child Visitation
Savannah GA, Richmond Hill, GA, Fort Stewart, Hinesville, Georgia Family Law Lawyer
In adversarial divorces, the parties are adversarial and unable to agree on the terms of divorce. Common areas of disagreement include, but are not limited to: grounds for divorce, custody of the children, visitation rights, division of the assets of the marriage, child support, maintenance (alimony), payment of family debts, contribution toward educational expenses (college or parochial), payment of health insurance for the dependent spouse, income tax structuring, etc. It is also referred to as a contested divorce.
Savannah GA Divorce Lawyer
GA Uncontested Divorce - Georgia Contested Divorce -
We specialize in: Georgia Separation Agreements - Spousal Support - Property Division - Alimony - Military Divorce - Contempt Actions in Divorce Cases, Uncontested Divorce, Savannah Georgia Noncontested divorce - Child Custody Attorney / Custody modification - Child Support Modification - Child Visitation
Savannah GA, Richmond Hill, GA, Fort Stewart, Hinesville, Georgia Family Law Lawyer
Monday, August 10, 2009
Savannah GA Divorce Lawyer - Savannah Georgia Uncontested Divorce - Husband files for divorce after wife tries to have him killed
Husband files for divorce after wife tries to have him killed
August 10, 2009 2:25 PM
Michael Dippolito officially filed for divorce after his wife, Dalia, was arrested for trying to have him killed. The court documents were filed Friday. The documents say the marriage is "irretrievably broken" and says the fact that Dalia allegedly tried to hire a hitman to have him killed shows that the marriage is over.
Also, one day before the hit was to supposed to go down last week, Mike Dippolito put the couple's townhome in his wife's name, giving her exclusive ownership of the property.
A lawsuit has also been filed in Palm Beach County Circuit Court, asking a judge to throw out a deed that gives Dalia Dippolito the couple's townhome and to restore the ownership to her husband Michael.
The lawsuit says Dalia never really loved her husband, and married him last February only because she wanted to get her hands on his $232,000 townhouse in Boynton Beach's Renaissance Commons.
The lawsuit says quote: "She did not love the Plaintiff and only married him to unlawfully obtain his property. She knew she wanted the Plaintiff dead and her representations of love and devotion were false at the time they were made... The sole purpose for the marriage was to convert all of his property to her own use."
Police say Dalia Dippolito tried to hire a hitman to kill her husband Michael. Little did she know, the person she tried to hire turned out to be an undercover police officer.
"I think it's pretty sad. It really is pretty sad you know when you think about it. But I think there's a lot more behind it that nobody knows about," said Jack Lynch, the couple's neighbor.
Dalia Dippolito is charged with solicitation to commit first degree murder.
She bonded out of jail Thursday and is now confined to her mother's house.
"I didn't do anything and I didn't plot anything! What was that? I didn't do anything and I didn't plot anything!" Dalia told reporters as police placed her in a squad car Wednesday following her arrest.
Now Michael Dippolito's ex-wife Maria is speaking out.
She says she has known Michael for over 10 years, and she calls him a "good guy."
In a written statement Maria says quote: "I am sorry to see what he is going through. It is unfortunate that someone would do this to another human being. We had a good marriage and he always made me happy and feel deserved. Our divorce was the result of differences that could not be worked out. He was a great husband..."
Maria still lives in south Florida and works in the medical field. She and Michael were married for about two years, and did not have any children together.
They got divorced in January.
We also have just learned who tipped the police off about the bizarre murder for hire plot.
According to the lawsuit filed by Michael Dippolito in which he seeks to regain ownership of the townhouse, Dalia Dippolito's boyfriend is the one who went to police. He's the one who blew the whistle.
According to the lawsuit, last month Dalia had convinced her husband Michael to sign a deed that would give her sole ownership of their quarter-million dollar townhome in Renaissance Commons in Boynton Beach.
That was on July 31. Less than a week later she was arrested when police say she tried to hire a hitman to kill him.
The lawsuit reveals that although Dalia and Michael had only been married for a few months she was already seeing another guy.
And it turns out that this boyfriend went to police and tipped them about the murder for hire plot.
The lawsuit says quote: "...she advised this man she wanted her husband killed. This person reported the conversation to the proper authorities."
Boynton Beach Police won't confirm that Dalia's boyfriend was the tipster.
A police spokeswoman says they don't comment on the identity of confidential informants who provide information to police.
Dalia Dippolito is charged with solicitation to commit murder, a charge that carries up to 30 years in prison.
Savannah GA Divorce Lawyer
Savannah GA Uncontested Divorce - Georgia Contested Divorce -
We specialize in: Georgia Separation Agreements - Spousal Support - Property Division - Alimony - Military Divorce - Contempt Actions in Divorce Cases, Uncontested Divorce, Savannah Georgia Noncontested divorce - Child Custody Attorney / Custody modification - Child Support Modification - Child Visitation
Savannah GA, Richmond Hill, GA, Fort Stewart, Hinesville, Georgia Family Law Lawyer
August 10, 2009 2:25 PM
Michael Dippolito officially filed for divorce after his wife, Dalia, was arrested for trying to have him killed. The court documents were filed Friday. The documents say the marriage is "irretrievably broken" and says the fact that Dalia allegedly tried to hire a hitman to have him killed shows that the marriage is over.
Also, one day before the hit was to supposed to go down last week, Mike Dippolito put the couple's townhome in his wife's name, giving her exclusive ownership of the property.
A lawsuit has also been filed in Palm Beach County Circuit Court, asking a judge to throw out a deed that gives Dalia Dippolito the couple's townhome and to restore the ownership to her husband Michael.
The lawsuit says Dalia never really loved her husband, and married him last February only because she wanted to get her hands on his $232,000 townhouse in Boynton Beach's Renaissance Commons.
The lawsuit says quote: "She did not love the Plaintiff and only married him to unlawfully obtain his property. She knew she wanted the Plaintiff dead and her representations of love and devotion were false at the time they were made... The sole purpose for the marriage was to convert all of his property to her own use."
Police say Dalia Dippolito tried to hire a hitman to kill her husband Michael. Little did she know, the person she tried to hire turned out to be an undercover police officer.
"I think it's pretty sad. It really is pretty sad you know when you think about it. But I think there's a lot more behind it that nobody knows about," said Jack Lynch, the couple's neighbor.
Dalia Dippolito is charged with solicitation to commit first degree murder.
She bonded out of jail Thursday and is now confined to her mother's house.
"I didn't do anything and I didn't plot anything! What was that? I didn't do anything and I didn't plot anything!" Dalia told reporters as police placed her in a squad car Wednesday following her arrest.
Now Michael Dippolito's ex-wife Maria is speaking out.
She says she has known Michael for over 10 years, and she calls him a "good guy."
In a written statement Maria says quote: "I am sorry to see what he is going through. It is unfortunate that someone would do this to another human being. We had a good marriage and he always made me happy and feel deserved. Our divorce was the result of differences that could not be worked out. He was a great husband..."
Maria still lives in south Florida and works in the medical field. She and Michael were married for about two years, and did not have any children together.
They got divorced in January.
We also have just learned who tipped the police off about the bizarre murder for hire plot.
According to the lawsuit filed by Michael Dippolito in which he seeks to regain ownership of the townhouse, Dalia Dippolito's boyfriend is the one who went to police. He's the one who blew the whistle.
According to the lawsuit, last month Dalia had convinced her husband Michael to sign a deed that would give her sole ownership of their quarter-million dollar townhome in Renaissance Commons in Boynton Beach.
That was on July 31. Less than a week later she was arrested when police say she tried to hire a hitman to kill him.
The lawsuit reveals that although Dalia and Michael had only been married for a few months she was already seeing another guy.
And it turns out that this boyfriend went to police and tipped them about the murder for hire plot.
The lawsuit says quote: "...she advised this man she wanted her husband killed. This person reported the conversation to the proper authorities."
Boynton Beach Police won't confirm that Dalia's boyfriend was the tipster.
A police spokeswoman says they don't comment on the identity of confidential informants who provide information to police.
Dalia Dippolito is charged with solicitation to commit murder, a charge that carries up to 30 years in prison.
Savannah GA Divorce Lawyer
Savannah GA Uncontested Divorce - Georgia Contested Divorce -
We specialize in: Georgia Separation Agreements - Spousal Support - Property Division - Alimony - Military Divorce - Contempt Actions in Divorce Cases, Uncontested Divorce, Savannah Georgia Noncontested divorce - Child Custody Attorney / Custody modification - Child Support Modification - Child Visitation
Savannah GA, Richmond Hill, GA, Fort Stewart, Hinesville, Georgia Family Law Lawyer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)