Opinion
67312.
DECIDED MARCH 13, 1984. REHEARING DENIED MARCH 30, 1984.
Discovery motion. Fulton Superior Court. Before Judge Alverson.
Harold D. Corlew, R. Douglas Lackey, Don L. Hartman, for appellant.
Joseph R. Cullens, Robert L. Pennington, Robert U. Wright, Joe C. Freeman, T. Ryan Mock, Jr., for appellees.
1. This is a statutory employer case and is controlled by Modlin v. Black Decker Mfg. Co., 170 Ga. App. 477 ( 317 S.E.2d 255) (1984).
2. In his second enumeration of error appellant contends the trial court erred in granting appellee's motion to quash notice of taking deposition and for a protective order. Appellant's argument is fairly persuasive in stating that the facts indicate that it was the normal routine for the defendant living in Cologne, Germany, to spend four to six days per month in Atlanta overseeing his business and that for him to come to Atlanta to give a deposition would not represent a financial hardship. Nevertheless, the trial judge has a wide discretion in determining issues in this area, and the appellate courts will not interfere with the trial court's decision on discovery matters absent a clear showing of abuse. Ambassador College v. Goetzke, 244 Ga. 322 ( 260 S.E.2d 27) (1979); Vaughn Co. v. Saul, 143 Ga. App. 74 ( 237 S.E.2d 622) (1977). Compare Global Van Lines v. Daniel Moving Storage, 159 Ga. App. 124 ( 283 S.E.2d 56) (1981) and Bridges v. 20th Century Travel, 149 Ga. App. 837, 838-839 ( 256 S.E.2d 102) (1979).
The trial court's order of October 15, 1982, gave the reasons for a reasonable exercise of a sound and legal discretion, as follows: "Defendant shall not be required to travel from [C]ologne, Germany for the purpose of submitting to a deposition by plaintiff. Plaintiff has numerous discovery methods at her disposal to obtain information without putting defendant to the undue burden which would result from being deposed in the United States. Included in the alternatives are the use of interrogatories, requests for production of documents, requests for admissions, and depositions upon written questions. If plaintiff chooses to depose defendant in [C]ologne, Germany, plaintiff shall be responsible for her own costs associated with such deposition. This order in no way limits plaintiff's right to depose defendant in [C]ologne, Germany."
We cannot say that the trial judge abused his discretion.
The trial court erred in granting the appellees' motion for summary judgment because of our holding in Division 1.
Judgment reversed. McMurray, C. J., Quillian, P. J., Shulman, P. J., Banke, Carley and Pope, JJ., concur. Birdsong and Sognier, JJ., dissent as to Division 1.
DECIDED MARCH 13, 1984 — REHEARING DENIED MARCH 30, 1984 — CERT. APPLIED FOR.
For the same reasons registered in the dissenting opinion of Modlin v. Black Decker Mfg. Co., 170 Ga. App. 477 ( 317 S.E.2d 255) (1984), I would affirm the judgment.
I respectfully dissent. I am authorized to state that Judge Sognier joins in this dissent.