Christopher M. Hunt, Sr. v. Ronald Cartledge

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Christopher M. Hunt, Sr. v. Ronald Cartledge

DecidedDecember 11, 2015

DocketA16D0118

StatusPublished

This text of Christopher M. Hunt, Sr. v. Ronald Cartledge (Christopher M. Hunt, Sr. v. Ronald Cartledge) 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.

Bluebook

Christopher M. Hunt, Sr. v. Ronald Cartledge, (Ga. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ December 02, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16D0118. CHRISTOPHER M. HUNT, SR. v. RONALD CARTLEDGE et al.

Christopher Hunt, Sr. filed this pro se application for discretionary appeal, purportedly seeking review of a trial court order denying his October 30, 2015, “Direct Attack on Order with Motion to Set Aside for Perjury/Fraud and Emergency Motion for TRO to Prevent Sale and Extraordinary Motion for New Trial” (the “October 30 Motion”). With his application materials, Hunt has submitted a trial court order signed on October 30, 2015. This order however, is not file-stamped and, in any event, does not dispose of any of the claims for relief that Hunt raised in his October 30 Motion. On November 3, 2015, we ordered Hunt to supplement his application within 10 days with a stamped “filed” copy of the order to be appealed. On November 13, 2015, Hunt filed, in this Court, a motion for an extension of time to file a stamped “filed” copy of the order to be appealed. Hunt asserts in this motion that no such order has yet been filed in the trial court. Consequently, Hunt’s application is premature because, given the apparent absence of a trial court order, we have nothing to review. See Amica v. State, 307 Ga. App. 276, 282 (2) (704 SE2d 831) (2010); see also Ward v. State, 299 Ga. App. 826, 827 (683 SE2d 894) (2009) (this Court is for the correction of errors and will not consider issues on which the trial court has not ruled). Accordingly, Hunt’s application is hereby DISMISSED. Hunt’s motion for an extension of time is DENIED as unnecessary. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 12/02/2015 Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 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

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ December 02, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16D0118. CHRISTOPHER M. HUNT, SR. v. RONALD CARTLEDGE et al.

Christopher Hunt, Sr. filed this pro se application for discretionary appeal, purportedly seeking review of a trial court order denying his October 30, 2015, “Direct Attack on Order with Motion to Set Aside for Perjury/Fraud and Emergency Motion for TRO to Prevent Sale and Extraordinary Motion for New Trial” (the “October 30 Motion”). With his application materials, Hunt has submitted a trial court order signed on October 30, 2015. This order however, is not file-stamped and, in any event, does not dispose of any of the claims for relief that Hunt raised in his October 30 Motion. On November 3, 2015, we ordered Hunt to supplement his application within 10 days with a stamped “filed” copy of the order to be appealed. On November 13, 2015, Hunt filed, in this Court, a motion for an extension of time to file a stamped “filed” copy of the order to be appealed. Hunt asserts in this motion that no such order has yet been filed in the trial court. Consequently, Hunt’s application is premature because, given the apparent absence of a trial court order, we have nothing to review. See Amica v. State, 307 Ga. App. 276, 282 (2) (704 SE2d 831) (2010); see also Ward v. State, 299 Ga. App. 826, 827 (683 SE2d 894) (2009) (this Court is for the correction of errors and will not consider issues on which the trial court has not ruled). Accordingly, Hunt’s application is hereby DISMISSED. Hunt’s motion for an extension of time is DENIED as unnecessary. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 12/02/2015 Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Christopher M. Hunt, Sr. v. Ronald Cartledge, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-m-hunt-sr-v-ronald-cartledge-gactapp-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack