Case Insights
- Judge Glenda Hatchett has been ordered to pay attorney fees to the Georgia Sheriffs Association after voluntarily withdrawing her lawsuit against the organization and its former member, Kris Coody.
- A judge in Morgan County ruled that Hatchett’s claims in the lawsuit “lacked merit,” paving the way for the order to award attorney fees to the association.
- The ruling opens the door for the Georgia Sheriffs Association to seek a substantial monetary award for its legal expenses, and it highlights the legal risks and consequences of filing a civil lawsuit that a court later determines to be without merit.
By Samuel Lopez – USA Herald
🔗 Follow USA Herald on X @RealUSAHerald
The legal saga involving television personality and former Judge Glenda Hatchett and former Sheriff Kris Coody has taken a surprising and costly turn. What began as a civil lawsuit seeking to hold Coody and the Georgia Sheriffs Association accountable for an alleged sexual assault has concluded with Hatchett herself facing a court order to pay the association’s legal fees. This development underscores the significant legal and financial risks involved in civil litigation and raises questions about the circumstances surrounding the lawsuit’s withdrawal.
The incident at the heart of the matter occurred during a reception at a winter conference for the Georgia Sheriffs Association in Cobb County. Hatchett, attending as a guest, alleges that Coody, a member of the association, groped and squeezed her breast. In a previous interview from August 2023, Hatchett described the incident in vivid detail: “He poked me in the heart of Georgia, right. And I did not take offense to that. But then he grabbed my breast. Grabbed my breast, was squeezing on my breast, and rubbing my breast.”
Coody subsequently pleaded guilty to the charge and resigned from his position as a sheriff. Following this, Hatchett filed a civil lawsuit against him and the Georgia Sheriffs Association. Her attorney, CK Hoffler, argued that the association bore some responsibility for the incident because it occurred at one of their events. “We believed that the Georgia Sheriff’s Association had some culpability, some liability from a civil standpoint, because this was a Georgia Association event. There were likely Georgia Association sponsors. He was a Georgia Association member and was at a Georgia Association conference,” said Hoffler.
However, Hatchett made the decision to withdraw her lawsuit, with her legal team citing the emotional toll of the experience and her desire to move on. Despite this stated reason, the legal proceedings took an unexpected turn. Judge Massey, presiding over the case in Morgan County, ruled that Hatchett’s claims “lacked merit,” a critical finding that led to the court’s decision to award attorney fees to the Georgia Sheriffs Association.
The ruling by Judge Massey is a significant setback for Hatchett and her legal team. By finding that the claims lacked merit, the court essentially determined that the lawsuit should not have been brought in the first place, at least not against the association. This is a far more serious outcome than simply having a lawsuit dismissed. When a court finds a lawsuit to be frivolous or lacking merit, it often empowers the opposing party to seek compensation for their legal expenses.
Kellye Moore, the attorney for the Georgia Sheriffs Association, expressed her view that the original lawsuit was frivolous. Moore stated that she and the association were now anticipating the court’s decision on the specific amount of the award. The potential for a substantial monetary award against Hatchett looms large, and she retains the right to contest the ruling.
This case serves as a powerful reminder of the delicate and often unforgiving nature of the legal system. While Hatchett’s initial pursuit of justice for the alleged assault was understandable, the civil claims against the Georgia Sheriffs Association proved to be on shaky ground. The decision to withdraw the lawsuit, while cited as an attempt to find peace and move on, was ultimately met with a judicial ruling that has created a new and potentially costly legal battle.
The legal proceedings may continue, as Hatchett has the right to contest the ruling to pay the association’s legal fees. Her legal team could argue against the amount requested or challenge the underlying premise of the judge’s ruling. However, the initial finding that her claims lacked merit places her in a difficult position. The case highlights the importance of thorough legal analysis and strategy before filing a civil lawsuit, particularly when seeking to hold a third-party organization accountable for the actions of an individual.
The outcome of this case will be closely watched by legal professionals and the public. It will not only determine the financial consequences for Judge Hatchett but also set a precedent for how similar cases of alleged third-party liability are handled in civil court. While the criminal case against Coody has concluded, the civil repercussions for all parties involved are far from over.
