Brown v. Mowr Enterprises, LLC
This text of 742 S.E.2d 173 (Brown v. Mowr Enterprises, LLC) 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
Trevor Brown appeals the judgment of the trial court granting a writ of possession to Mowr Enterprises, LLC. Acting pro se, Brown has submitted a brief which contains no enumeration of errors, no jurisdictional statement, no statement of the applicable standard of review, no succinct statement of the proceedings below and material facts relevant to the appeal, no citations to the record, and no citations to legal authority. His brief therefore fails to comport with OCGA § 5-6-40 and the rules of this court.1
“We recognize that [Brown] is acting pro se; nevertheless, that status does not relieve [him] of the obligation to comply with the substantive and procedural requirements of the law, including the rules of this [c]ourt.”2 “It is not the function of this [c]ourt to cull the record on behalf of a party in search of instances of error. The burden is upon the party alleging error to show it affirmatively in the record.”3 Under these circumstances, Brown has “failed to carry the burden devolving upon him of demonstrating to this court that error [94]*94was committed by the trial court”4 in granting the writ of possession. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court must be affirmed.5
2. We decline Mowr Enterprises’s request pursuant to Court of Appeals Rule 15 (b) for the imposition of a frivolous appeal penalty.6
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
742 S.E.2d 173, 322 Ga. App. 93, 2013 Fulton County D. Rep. 1575, 2013 WL 1943449, 2013 Ga. App. LEXIS 395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-mowr-enterprises-llc-gactapp-2013.