this argument, but we discern no error in the district court’s conclusion. A reasonable jury could find that WM knew that a separate contract existed for the retrieval of sales leads, because WM knew that the sales leads were not provided by WM itself, and probably knew that TBI was not itself providing the sales leads. This meant that a third party must have been providing the service to GT, and there was sufficient evidence of interference by WM. We also find no error in the award of attorneys’ fees in the second trial. The Supreme Court of Georgia has stated that there is no proportionality requirement between attorneys’ fees and compensatory damages where a showing of bad faith has been made under O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11. Tyler v. Lincoln, 272 Ga. 118, 527 S.E.2d 180, 183 (2000) (<HOLDING>); Spring Lake Prop. Owners Ass’n, Inc. v.
holding that the right to nominal damages was waived in a breach of duty action when plaintiff failed to raise the issue of nominal damages until after the verdict holding that nominal damages award was appropriate where the evidence supporting the damages was speculative holding that  13611 authorizes an attorney fee award even when nominal damages are recovered holding that when a jury finds section 1988 liability but fails to award damages nominal damages are available to plaintiff holding that the first amendment right to free speech is absolute and an award of nominal damages is required even if the defendant fails to object to the nominal damages instruction