Lynn v. Abernathy Engineering Group, LLC, [A25A2150, Jan. 20, 2026] __ S.E.2d __ (Ga. Ct. App. 2026). The court (Brown, C.J.; Barnes, P.J., and Watkins, J., concur) vacated and remanded with directions holding that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment based solely on deemed admissions without first determining whether to permit withdrawal of those admissions under OCGA § 9-11-36(b). Although the defendants failed to respond timely to requests for admissions, their affidavit and counsel’s arguments at the summary judgment hearing substantively sought withdrawal of the admissions, and courts must look to the substance of a filing rather than its nomenclature. Ms.**4–7.
The court reiterated that a party seeking withdrawal of admissions need not show providential cause or excusable neglect. Instead, withdrawal is governed by a two-pronged test: (1) whether presentation of the merits will be subserved, and (2) whether the opposing party would be prejudiced in maintaining its action or defense on the merits. OCGA § 9-11-36(b); Ms.**5–6. The loss of a summary judgment or default is not the type of prejudice contemplated by the statute. Ms.*6.
Because the trial court failed to apply this standard and instead treated the admissions as conclusively established without considering withdrawal, the grant of summary judgment was vacated and the case remanded for the trial court to determine, in the first instance, whether withdrawal of the admissions should be permitted before ruling on summary judgment. Ms.**6–7.