AKINYELE ADAMS v. HUMBERTO LUIS OSARIO
This text of AKINYELE ADAMS v. HUMBERTO LUIS OSARIO (AKINYELE ADAMS v. HUMBERTO LUIS OSARIO) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA,____________________ December 24, 2025
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
A26A0795. AKINYELE ADAMS et al v. HUMBERTO LUIS OSARIO.
Humberto Luis Osario (“Plaintiff”) filed this breach of contract, negligence, trespass, and dispossessory action in state court against Akinyele Adams and others (“Defendants”). Defendants filed an answer and counterclaims, seeking damages. The state court granted Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment as to the request for a writ of possession only. Defendants filed a notice of appeal from the state court’s ruling. We, however, lack jurisdiction. As a general rule, a right of direct appeal lies from a final judgment, that is, where the case is no longer pending below. See OCGA § 5-6-34(a)(1). Here, the record contains no indication that the trial court has adjudicated Plaintiff’s claims for breach of contract, negligence, or trespass, or Defendants’ counterclaims. Because the case is still pending, Defendants were required to comply with the interlocutory appeal procedures of OCGA § 5-6-34(b) — including obtaining a certificate of immediate review— in order to obtain appellate review at this juncture. See Underwood v. Dunn, 215 Ga. App. 252, 252-53 (451 SE2d 129) (1994); Commercial Credit Corp. v. Hawkins, 156 Ga. App. 135, 136 (1) (274 SE2d 132) (1980). To the extent Defendants contend they are entitled to a direct appeal from the grant of the writ of possession pursuant to OCGA § 44-7-56, that code section provides no special rights of direct appeal, but makes appeals taken in dispossessory proceedings subject to “Chapters 3, 6, and 7 of Title 5” of the code, as applicable. See Whiddon v. Stargell, 192 Ga. App. 826, 827 (386 SE2d 884) (1989). Defendants’ failure to comply with the appropriate appellate procedure deprives this Court of jurisdiction over this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED. Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the appeal on other grounds is MOOT.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 12/24/2025 I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.
, Clerk.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
AKINYELE ADAMS v. HUMBERTO LUIS OSARIO, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/akinyele-adams-v-humberto-luis-osario-gactapp-2025.