Georgia Supreme Court affirms Chatham man’s removal from homeowner’s association
Savannah Morning News
By Kelly Quimby
17 February 2017

The Willow Lakes Plantation subdivision in west Chatham County.
(Kelly Quimby/Savannah Morning News)

The Georgia Supreme Court has affirmed an earlier ruling that removed a local man from a leadership position in his neighborhood’s homeowners association while a civil case continues in Chatham County courts.

In an opinion earlier this month, the court’s justices ruled the Superior Court of Chatham County properly granted an injunction against Leonard McCoy, removing him from his post as president of the board of directors for the Willow Lakes Plantation Homeowners Association.

The Willow Lakes Plantation community is located off Quacco Road, on the west side of unincorporated Chatham County.

In 2012, more than a dozen Willow Lakes Plantation homeowners filed a complaint against McCoy, the board of directors and the homeowners association over what they alleged was mismanagement of the association and its member-supported funds.

The complaint alleged that under McCoy’s leadership, the homeowners association’s board of directors hired his wife, Alizina Wallace-McCoy — a candidate last year for the Chatham County Commission and a fellow member of the board of directors — to conduct financial management services, and his stepson, who operates a landscaping business. The 17 property owners asked the court to appoint a receiver to take over management of the association’s finances, according to a summary of the case published by the Supreme Court’s public information office.

Superior Court appointed a receiver

The Superior Court found good cause existed and in March 2013, appointed a local attorney and municipal court judge, J. Hamrick Gnann Jr., to oversee the association’s financial affairs. Gnann later hired Lanier Realty, a local property management company, to manage the HOA’s operations.

McCoy, who had been elected and reelected president of the homeowners association board, challenged the receiver and his actions. His wife and stepson subsequently filed individual lawsuits against the homeowners association to collect fees they said they were due. Both lawsuits were ultimately dismissed with no recovery.

In May 2015, Gnann filed a petition with the Superior Court to broaden his powers. In the petition, Gnann alleged that McCoy and his wife were attempting to damage the HOA’s operation. A trial was held in September 2015.

A few months later, in January 2016, Superior Court Judge James Bass issued an order to remove McCoy from the homeowners association board, and ordered the board’s remaining members to cooperate with Gnann and Lanier Realty to “effectively operate the homeowners association.”

In the Supreme Court opinion penned by Justice Keith R. Blackwell, the court unanimously ruled that despite McCoy’s claims that the Superior Court erroneously removed him from his post, Judge Bass properly made his own determinations about credibility and evidence in his ruling on the disputed facts.

“While McCoy may not have liked the management company hired by Gnann, the trial court explicitly approved the hiring of that company after a hearing in 2014, and that decision was not appealed,” the opinion said. “And as found by the trial court, the removal of McCoy from the board maintains the status quo because it prevents the further waste of assets that Gnann was appointed to protect.”

The Feb. 6 opinion said McCoy’s other claims about the Superior Court’s errors were without merit and did not warrant discussion.

Savannah attorney Christian J. Steinmetz III, who represented Gnann in the Superior Court and in the appeal to the Supreme Court, said the court came to the right conclusion after its review of the evidence in the case.

“The (Chatham County Superior Court’s) ruling was entirely supported by the facts as applied to the law. Judge Bass of Superior Court was fully justified in taking the actions that he took,” Steinmetz said. “One of the more telling aspects in the opionion is the Supreme Court’s findings relative to Mr. McCoy’s actions.”

Another important facet of the opinion, he said, was the high court’s dismissal of McCoy’s other error claims as being without merit and not warranting discussion.

Reached by phone this week, McCoy declined to comment on the opinion and deferred questions to his attorney, Walter Ballew III. Messages left for Ballew this week were not immediately returned.


top  contents  appendix   previous   next