When an Auction Company Violates a Duty Resulting in Harm And Damages to a Georgia Auctioneer s/he Can Recover damages in Tort from the Company

The Court of Appeal of Georgia held in Morris v. Gavin, Inc., 268 Ga. App. 771 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004) that the auctioneer, in order to recover from the auction company or its principal for tortious conduct, had to show that  the auction company violated a duty which they had towards auctioneer and which harmed auctioneer and resulted in damages. The auctioneer in this case could not prove that the auction company and/or the principal violated a duty towards the auctioneer. The court stated that the arrest of the Plainitff by North Carolina authorities was the result of her own actions and there was no violation of duty by the Defendant auction company. Therefore, the court affirmed the trial court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendants.  The case is discussed below. 
           
In this case, Morris (“Plaintiff”), a licensed auctioneer was working with Gavin Inc.(“Defendant”). Plaintiff sued Defendant and its principal in trial court for damages resulting from principal’s tortious conduct.  The Plaintiff conducted an auction in Charlotte, North Carolina for Defendant.  North Carolina law requires that an auctioneer to conduct an auction must be licensed and the name of the auctioneer and license of the auctioneer must be included in auction advertisement. Later, the North Carolina Auctioneer Licensing Board (“Board”) contacted Plaintiff to inform her about the omission of her name in advertisement.  The Plaintiff informed the Board that the omission was a mere oversight.  However, despite of this illegality the said auction was held in North Carolina.  While at auction, a Licensing Board representative arrested the Plaintiff and imposed a fine for contracting and advertising an auction without license. 

Later, the Plaintiff sued Defendants in the trial court of Georgia for damages resulting from the principal's tortious conduct in the conduct of an auction in North Carolina. The trial court granted defendants' summary judgment motion, and the auctioneer appealed.
           
The Georgia Court of Appeals noted that, the Plaintiff was the subject of an administrative complaint in Texas based on her actions in North Carolina. The complaint was subsequently dropped, and no fine was levied and also the subject of an unresolved complaint in Louisiana.  Apart from the auction in North Carolina, Plaintiff claimed that Defendant conducted auctions in other states using her name and license number without her consent and has applied for auctioneer licenses in her name in other states without her knowledge or consent. However, in her deposition testimony, Plaintiff admitted that she had not suffered any damages from the use of her name or license by Defendants. Id.

The appellate court stated that in order to recover for tortious conduct under Georgia law, there must be the violation of a duty of the defendant to the plaintiff, which causes harm to the plaintiff and results in damages. The court did not find any evidence in the affidavits, depositions, and other documents in the record that Defendant in this case have violated a duty owed to plaintiff which resulted in injury to her. Id. at 773

The court further noted that plaintiff in her deposition acknowledged that she knew that Defendant could not legally hold an auction in North Carolina without having a firm auctioneer license from that state, yet she proceeded to conduct an auction in North Carolina. She was, in fact, arrested by North Carolina authorities for holding an auction without the proper license. Therefore, her arrest was the result of her own actions.  There was no violation of a duty the Defendants owed her. Id. at 773.