Johannes S. Kingma (Joe)

Federal Syndicated Conservation Easement class action. Won a motion to dismiss for a client in a Federal Syndicated Conservation Easement class action filed against 30 different defendants including lawyers, accountants, appraisers, promoters, and engineers. Claims included RICO, malpractice, negligent misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraud. Our client was one of only six defendants who were dismissed by the 251 page order.

Georgia Court of Appeals Affirms Summary Judgment Shooting Down Damages Claim (January 2023). Dan Millman and Joe Kingma prevailed for a Georgia municipality which had denied a liquor license. While Court of Appeals did not address whether the applicant was entitled to the license it agreed that damages for lost profits were not available.

Joe Kingma and Billy Newcomb prevail for their attorney clients on a motion to dismiss in the State Court of Muscogee County. The case arose from a receivership action filed after a real estate partnership fell apart beset by allegations of fraud and self-dealing. The receivership was hotly contested and the original receiver was replaced. Plaintiff alleged the attorney defendants filed the receivership to wrongfully strip him of his interests in 8-figure real estate developments. The original judge withdrew after hearing the motion. But after several years, extensive briefing and multiple hearings, all the claims against the clients including fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence were dismissed in February 2022.

Unanimous Supreme Court Reverses Court of Appeals and Finds Waiver of Attorney Privilege (February 2020). The case arose from a battle for control of a California aerospace company that had spawned litigation in California and Georgia. One group of litigants brought malpractice claims against Joe's law firm client. Joe sought discovery from another law firm that had also advised the plaintiffs. The trial court granted discovery of the plaintiff's communication with the second firm but the Court of Appeals reversed. The Supreme Court agreed that the privilege was waived by the filing of the malpractice suit.

Joe Kingma Prevails for Bankruptcy Trustee in 66 Page Order (April 2019). Joe represented a bankruptcy trustee in an adversary action relating to three bankruptcy estates. Claims were asserted against the trustee by debtors. The underlying case involved several appeals to the U.S. District Court and had lingered for five years due to the complex bankruptcy issues. After a year and a half of litigation, a motion to dismiss was granted in its entirety. The case presented complexities including: issue preclusion, claim preclusion, liability of a bonding company, finality of orders, failure to state a claim under Twombly, absolute immunity, and the statute of limitations. When the dust settled at the end of 66 pages, all claims against the client were dismissed in their entirety.

Jeff Hoffmeyer and Joe Kingma defeated a complex motion which, if granted, would have been disastrous for their receiver client. Jeff and Joe’s client had been appointed receiver of an entity that owned and operated nine hotels. Disputes arose amongst the entity’s investors and litigation commenced. Once appointed, the receiver ran the hotels, hiring professionals and others to keep the hotels in operation. After a couple of years and substantial related litigation, the Georgia Court of Appeals ruled that the judge who appointed the receiver should have recused himself and thus the orders appointing the receiver and authorizing payments to him totaling more than $2,000,000 were void. The defendants, who had opposed the receivership, filed a motion seeking to have all the receiver’s fees and expenses repaid by the receiver individually. Jeff Hoffmeyer argued the highly contested motion in a courtroom filled with more than 15 attorneys for the parties. The trial court entered an order denying all the relief sought by the movants against the receiver.

Summary Judgment in Legal Malpractice Claim Arising From a Prominent Divorce (September 2018). Joe won summary judgment for a lawyer in a malpractice suit arising from a mid-8 figure divorce which had been extensively covered in the national media. The claim involved the division of appreciated assets, capital gains, and the tax ramifications of paying off margin debt. Joe sought summary judgment, arguing that (1) plaintiff failed to show a casual relationship between the claimed misconduct and any resulting damages, (2) plaintiff failed to show that she would have obtained a better result at trial, and (3) plaintiff failed to show that she could have obtained a better settlement of her claim. The Court granted the motion and the Court of Appeals affirmed.

Jury Verdict for Defendant in Defamation Claim. Jury verdict after a seven day trial in which client law firm was sued by a plaintiff represented by a national law firm who spent two million dollars prosecuting a defamation claim.

Audit Firm Malpractice Defense - Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. A New York audit firm was sued for malpractice in federal court in Georgia. Our ultimate complete triumph was the result of a partial grant of summary judgment, a jury verdict and judicial enforcement of a damage limitation provision. We held that judgment in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

Plaintiff Win in Trial for Specific Performance and Fraudulent Conveyance. Represented a plaintiff in trial for specific performance and fraudulent conveyance resulting in plaintiff's verdict and millions of dollars in benefit to clients.

Jury Verdict for Bank - Fraudulent Lending and Wrongful Foreclosure. Jury verdict for a bank sued for fraudulent lending and wrongful foreclosure during the height of the financial crisis.

Unanimous Georgia Supreme Court Excludes Evidence of Defendants Wealth. On January 22, 2013, the Supreme Court of Georgia ruled on a question certified from the U.S. District Court and held that juries imposing damages under O.C.G.A. § 51-12-6 are not entitled to see evidence of the defendant's "worldly circumstances," i.e., wealth. The question arose during a trial before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia in Augusta.