Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Sep 30, 2025 | 784 S.E.2d 373
...We
granted Ultra’s petition for a writ of certiorari to address whether
the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the Superior Court of Fulton
County’s order dismissing with prejudice Ultra’s appeal to the
superior court from a decision of the Georgia Lottery Corporation
(“GLC”) pursuant to OCGA §
50-27-102....
...Pertinent Facts and Procedural History.
The parties do not dispute the following pertinent facts. On
July 30, 2021, a GLC hearing officer entered an order designated as
an “Interim Award” in the parties’ GLC arbitration proceedings held
pursuant to OCGA §
50-27-102 (c).1 The hearing officer largely ruled
in Prince’s favor, granting summary judgment on the substantive
issues regarding the application of the contract but leaving the
remaining claims for fees and costs pursuant to the contract
unresolved. On September 17, 2021, the hearing officer entered a
second order, titled “Final Award,” which expressly adopted and
incorporated the Interim Award, split the arbitration costs, and
1 At the time of the hearing, §
50-27-102(c) was then OCGA § 50-27-
102(d). In 2024, subsection (d) was redesignated as subsection (c) with minor,
immaterial changes. See Ga. L. 2024, p. 739, 748-750, § 11. We note that the
applicable rules of the GLC still refer to OCGA §
50-27-102(d) and not § 50-27-
102(c).
2
awarded Ultra attorney fees.2 The parties received the Final Award
on October 4, 2021.
Ultra sought review of the hearing officer’s Final Award by
filing a...
...4
In the order granting the writ of certiorari, this Court informed
the parties that it was particularly concerned with the following:
When a Georgia Lottery Corporation hearing officer
appointed pursuant to OCGA §
50-27-102 (c) issues a
nonfinal order, must the aggrieved party file a motion for
review with the Georgia Lottery Corporation’s chief
executive within 10 days of receipt of that order? Would
failure to timely move for review...
...issued by the GLC hearing officer and that Ultra timely appealed
6
from that order.
First, it is important to view the GLC rules in context. Under
Georgia law, the GLC has “jurisdiction of all disputes” involving its
COAM licensees. OCGA §
50-27-102(c)(2). 4 While this Code section
sets forth the general framework for appealing GLC decisions,
OCGA §
50-27-102(c)(5), 5 it also directs the GLC to adopt rules
governing its dispute resolution procedure. OCGA §
50-27-102(c)(3).6
4 OCGA §
50-27-102(c)(2) provides, in pertinent part:
The corporation shall have jurisdiction of all disputes
between and among any licensees or former licensees whose
licenses were issued pursuant to this article relating in any way...
...any agreement involving coin operated amusement machines,
distribution of funds, tortious interference with contract, other
claims against a subsequent master licensee or location owner, or
any other claim involving coin operated amusement machines[.]
5 OCGA §
50-27-102(c)(5) provides:
The decision of the hearing officer may be appealed to the
chief executive officer or his or her designee....
...r’s
findings of fact unless it is against the weight of the evidence as
set forth in Code Section
5-5-21, and the chief executive officer’s
legal conclusions shall not be set aside unless there is an error of
law.
6 OCGA §
50-27-102(c)(3) provides, in pertinent part:
7
As is pertinent to this case, although the GLC would not be
authorized under this Code section to adopt a rule that foreclosed
appeals to the superior cour...
...Such
rules shall be consistent with the Georgia Arbitration Code[.]
7 Prince does not argue that construing the GLC rules to require that
appeals be taken from the hearing officer’s Executive Order is inconsistent
with either the Georgia Arbitration Code or OCGA §
50-27-102(c)(5).
8 We note that, although the legislature expressly provided for
interlocutory review in other administrative proceedings, see OCGA § 50-13-
19(a) (stating that “[an] intermediate agency action or ruling is immediately
reviewable if review of the final agency decision would not provide an adequate
remedy”), it did not do so for GLC proceedings under OCGA §
50-27-102(c)....
...The
Lottery is “an instrumentality of the state, and not a state agency, and a public
corporation.” OCGA §
50-27-4. Further, Georgia’s Administrative Procedure
Act does not apply to GLC COAM arbitrations. See OCGA §
50-27-9(a)(19)
(“Hearings under Code Section
50-27-102 shall be held in accordance with the
provisions of Part 1 of Article 1 of Chapter 9 of Title 9, the ‘Georgia Arbitration
Code.”).
8
that “[a] party must follow the intra-agency appeal procedure as
outlined in this Rule....
