Multiple Summary Judgment Motions

Q. Can a party can file for summary judgment again after summary judgment has been denied? We have fought off a summary judgment and the defendant has filed again with an affidavit to address the shortcomings that the court pointed out to the defendant. Is that allowed?

A. There is no limit on the number of summary judgment motions that may be filed. T. L. Rogers Oil Co. v. S.C. Nat'l Bank, 203 Ga. App. 605, 606 (1992). This is true even if no additional evidence is presented. Eastern Car Liner, Ltd. v. Kyles, 280 Ga. App. 362, 364 (2006); Hubbard v. DOT, 256 Ga. App. 342, 344 (2002). It is true even if the appellate court denied an application for interlocutory appeal from the denial of the original motion. Clark v. Cauthen, 239 Ga. App. 226, 229 (1999). And if new grounds arise for the renewed motion, it can be granted even if the appellate court affirmed the denial of the first motion. Brewer v. Schacht, 235 Ga. App. 313 (1998). This is because "an order is subject to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the claims and liabilities of the parties." Buchan v. Lawrence Metal Prods., 270 Ga. App. 517, 518 (2004).

The same is true in federal courts, at least if there is no local rule against renewed summary judgment motions. Cordoba v. Dillard's, Inc., 419 F.3d 1169, 1188 (11th Cir. 2005). One potential argument against the renewed motion is that it might be a means to circumvent the district court's page limits.

However, the trial court has discretion to consider or not any renewed motions. Bickerstaff Real Estate Mgmt., LLC v. Hanners, 292 Ga. App. 554, 555 n.3 (2008).

If the motion is filed shortly before trial, it would easily undermine the purpose of Unif. Sup. Ct. Rule 6.6, which provides: "Motions for summary judgment shall be filed sufficiently early so as not to delay the trial. No trial shall be continued by reason of the delayed filing of a motion for summary judgment."

Finally, if the "new" motion is really just a repeat of the argument that already lost once (or more than once), one option to consider is a motion for sanctions under 9-15-14 against the movant and movant's counsel, jointly and severally. I do not recommend this unless the purpose is clearly for delay, to cause attrition, or otherwise improper.