Smart Venture Capital, LLC v. River Mansions Property Association, Inc.

── Smart Venture Capital, LLC v. River Mansions Property Association, Inc. ── Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia Date: April 21, 2026 Category: General FIFTH DIVISION BROWN, C. J., RICKMAN, P. J., and MERCIER, J. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules April 21, 2026 In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A26A0540. SMART VENTURE CAPITAL, LLC v. RIVER MANSIONS PROPERTY ASSOCIATION, INC. MERCIER, Judge. Smart Venture Capital, LLC (“Smart Venture”) appeals from the trial court’s order dismissing its notice of appeal in this matter. For reasons that follow, we reverse. The record shows that, in May 2020, River Mansions Property Owners Association, Inc. (“the Association”) sued Viren Patel and Anupama Patel for damages and judicial foreclosure relating to the Patels’ alleged failure to pay association assessments on property located in Duluth. On October 9, 2020, the Association filed an amended complaint adding Smart Venture — which held a security deed on the Patel property — as a defendant to the lawsuit. A private process server attempted to serve Smart Venture’s registered agent three times at the corporation’s principal address, but service was unsuccessful. On December 2, 2022, the process server filed an affidavit describing her service efforts. That same day, the Association’s counsel filed an affidavit stating that the Association had exercised diligence in attempting to perfect service through a process server, but had been unsuccessful. Counsel further averred that he had served Smart Venture pursuant to OCGA § 14-11-1108 by mailing the amended complaint and accompanying documents to Smart Venture’s office by certified mail, return receipt requested. Smart Venture did not answer the complaint, and, on July 22, 2021, the Association moved for default judgment. The trial court granted the motion on January 11, 2022, authorized the Association to initiate foreclosure proceedings on the property, and cancelled Smart Venture’s security deed.1 On August 13, 2024, Smart Venture moved to set aside the default judgment pursuant to OCGA § 9-11-60(d)(1), asserting that it had not been served with process. In support of the motion, Smart Venture submitted the affidavit of its registered agent, 1 The trial court also granted default judgment as to Anupama Patel in the amount of $9,451.46, and, in a separate order, granted the Association summary judgment against Viren Patel in the amount of $8,535.44. Those orders are not at issue in this appeal. 2 who averred that she was never served with the lawsuit, did not receive any mail (certified or otherwise) from the Association or its counsel during the relevant time period, and “was not aware of this lawsuit until recently.” The trial court denied the motion to set aside following a hearing held on December 9, 2024, concluding that the Association exercised reasonable diligence in attempting service through a private process server, then properly served Smart Venture via certified mail pursuant to OCGA § 14-11-1108. We granted Smart Venture’s application for discretionary review of that ruling, and Smart Venture filed its notice of appeal on March 3, 2025, specifying that the transcript from the December 9, 2024 hearing be included in the appellate record. In an effort to secure the December 9 transcript, Smart Venture reached out to the trial court on March 4, 2025, seeking contact information for the court reporter. The trial court responded with the information that same day. On March 18, 2025, Smart Venture requested that the court reporter prepare the transcript. After back and forth communication about completing payment, the court reporter i