Doyle of the Court of Appeals of Georgia issued the decision on 27 October 2026. The dispute began in September 2021, according to court filings described in the opinion. On 17 May 2022, Pierre filed a breach of contract lawsuit in state court.
That month, Ramirez and Big Sky signed a renovation agreement with real estate firm Cadenas Ventures, LLC. A Georgia appeals court has thrown out a six-figure default judgment in a disputed home building project. It ruled that the trial courts never gained proper legal power over a construction company. It also ruled that they used the wrong steps when they worked out the money award. Presiding Judge Sara L. It set aside the judgment that had been given to homeowner representative Jionel E. Pierre against contractor Juan Ramirez and Big Sky Remodel and Construction, LLC. The job was to remodel a house in Powder Springs, Georgia. The working relationship broke down over claims that the work was not done properly. Cadenas Ventures then passed its legal rights to Pierre. He named Ramirez and Big Sky as joint defendants and asked for tens of thousands of dollars in damages.
It ended up awarding about $186,000 to the plaintiff. Under Official Code of Georgia Annotated Section 9-11-4(e)(1)(A), a company or limited liability company must be served in person. They said the original assignment contract from Cadenas Ventures was not attached as an exhibit to the first court filing in May 2022. Court records showed that the assignment agreement passing rights from Cadenas Ventures to Pierre was signed on 1 May 2022.
Because of faulty service is void, the court repeated that under state procedural law, a judgment made without valid personal jurisdiction. State law therefore required the plaintiff to present formal, checkable evidence at an evidentiary hearing. Because the assignment happened before the lawsuit began, the court held that Pierre had valid legal standing to pursue the claims.
The court confirmed that Ramirez had defaulted by not filing an answer to the first complaint.
“Under these circumstances, the trial court never obtained personal jurisdiction over Big Sky, and thus, the default judgment entered against Big Sky is void,” Presiding Judge Doyle stated in the written ruling. “While the trial court’s finding of default against Ramirez was proper, the entry of judgment thereon was premature,” Presiding Judge Doyle wrote. Neither defendant filed a written defense on time. The lower trial court then entered a default judgment against both. Presiding Judge Doyle wrote for the Second Division of the appeals court, along with Judges Jeffrey A. Davis and Amanda H. Whitaker. She found that the trial court made a basic legal error. It issued a binding judgment against Big Sky without proof that the company was properly served. The summons and complaint must be handed to an executive officer, a named managing director, or an officially registered agent of the company. The appeals record showed that process servers did not deliver the papers to an authorized agent of Big Sky. Nothing showed that Ramirez was formally served as a representative of the company. It can be challenged at any point in the case. The Court of Appeals also found that the trial court moved too soon. It finalized judgment and set money damages against Ramirez as an individual. But it noted that Pierre’s lawsuit clearly claimed that Ramirez and Big Sky shared joint and several liability under the building contract. Under settled Georgia case law, a lawsuit may claim joint liability against several defendants. If service is incomplete or disputed for one of them, the trial court cannot right away enter a final money judgment against the defaulting party. Claims against the co-defendant must be settled first. She explained that the lower court had to settle the question of jurisdiction over the co-defendant first. The appeals panel also pointed out that the lawsuit involved unliquidated damages. This means the contract itself did not fix exact dollar amounts. That evidence had to prove the exact cost of repairs or financial losses before any court could grant an award. The appeals court ruled for the contractor team on service and damages procedures. But it turned down a separate argument from Ramirez and Big Sky, who wanted the whole case thrown out for lack of standing. The defense team argued that Pierre had no legal right to bring the suit. The Court of Appeals rejected that argument. It stressed that standing depends on whether the legal right was properly held on the date the complaint was started. It does not depend on whether paperwork was attached to the first court filing. The Court of Appeals vacated the lower court’s judgment order. It sent the case back to the trial judge for more proceedings that follow the rules on service and evidentiary hearings. You use AI every day. Now get your AI Quotient. Take the AIQ test.
That was two weeks before the lawsuit was filed in court.