MCFADDEN, P. J., MCMILLIAN and GOSS, JJ.
McFadden, Presiding Judge.
appeals arise from a dispute over a commercial lease
containing an option to purchase. The parties filed
cross-motions for summary judgment, and the landlord filed a
motion for release of funds paid into the registry of the
court. The trial court ruled that New Era Ventures, LLC, the
tenant, is entitled to specific performance of the
option-to-purchase provision of the lease and that Siarah
Atlanta Hwy, LLC, the landlord, is entitled to the funds paid
into the registry of the court. The parties filed these
No. A19A0724, Siarah argues that the trial court erred by
finding that New Era properly exercised the option to
purchase and by failing to find that Siarah had validly
terminated the lease. We hold that New Era's notice of
its exercise of the option was effective and that Siarah did
not terminate the lease. In Case No. A19A0725, New Era argues
that the trial court erred by releasing to Siarah funds New
Era had paid into the court registry for rent and other
charges. We hold that the trial court did not err by awarding
Siarah funds as rent, but we vacate the order in part and
remand for the trial court to address whether the amount
should be reduced by an award of breach-of-contract damages
to New Era. We also vacate the part of the trial court's
order awarding attorney fees and remand because, in an
apparent oversight, the court left blank the amount of
attorney fees awarded to New Era.
Facts and procedural posture.
facts are undisputed. Siarah owns a parcel of commercial
property in Forsyth County. On May 1, 2015, Siarah and New
Era entered a commercial lease contract under which New Era
leased a portion of the property for an initial term of ten
years. The contract granted Siarah the right to terminate the
lease "for any reason whatsoever, by providing [New Era]
with thirty (30) days written notice." In exchange for a
payment of $175, 000, the contract granted New Era the option
to purchase the property. It provided:
Option to Purchase.
31.1. Purchase Option. PROVIDED TENANT IS NOT IN
DEFAULT AND HAS LEASED THE PROPERTY CONTINUOUSLY FROM THE
DATE HEREOF UNTIL SUCH DATE, LANDLORD GRANTS TO TENANT, AFTER
NINE (9) MONTHS FROM THE COMMENCEMENT DATE HEREOF, AND
EXPIRING Forty-eight (48) MONTHS FROM THE COMMENCEMENT DATE
HEREOF, ONLY (the "Option Period"), THE OPTION TO
PURCHASE FROM LANDLORD THE REAL ESTATE OF WHICH THE
PREMISES IS PART AND WHICH IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED ON
EXHIBIT B. TENANT MAY EXERCISE THE OPTION BY
PROVIDING WRITTEN NOTICE TO LANDLORD AT LEAST NINETY (90)
DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF CLOSING (the "Option
(Emphasis in original.)
accordance with the contract, New Era paid Siarah $175, 000
for the option to purchase the property. On January 27, 2017,
New Era sent Siarah notice that it would exercise the option.
That same day, Siarah sent New Era notice that it was
terminating the lease and demanding possession within 30
April 2017, Siarah filed a petition for a writ of possession
against New Era in the Magistrate Court of Forsyth County.
New Era filed a counterclaim, alleging breach of contract and
seeking specific performance of the option-to-purchase
provision of the lease contract. The magistrate court
transferred the case to the Superior Court of Forsyth County.
Then Siarah successfully moved to transfer the case to
Gwinnett County because of a choice-of-venue provision in the
lease. Siarah also amended its complaint to assert claims for
breach of contract and slander of title.
parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and Siarah
moved for release of the funds New Era had paid into the
registry of the court for rent and other charges. The trial
court ruled that New Era was entitled to specific performance
of the option-to-purchase provision and that Siarah was
entitled to the funds paid into the court registry. These
judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine issue of
material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law. We apply a de novo standard of appellate
review and view the evidence, and all reasonable conclusions
and inferences drawn from it, in the light most favorable to
the nonmovant." Logistics Intl. v.