Derek Leroy McSmith v. Bank of America, N.A.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedNovember 7, 2019
DocketA20A0430
StatusPublished

This text of Derek Leroy McSmith v. Bank of America, N.A. (Derek Leroy McSmith v. Bank of America, N.A.) 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
Derek Leroy McSmith v. Bank of America, N.A., (Ga. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ November 07, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A20A0430. DEREK LEROY MCSMITH v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.

This matter began as a dispossessory proceeding in magistrate court. After an unfavorable ruling, McSmith appealed to superior court. In May 2016, the superior court granted summary judgment in favor of Bank of America. We denied McSmith’s discretionary application seeking to appeal from that ruling. See Case No. A16D0408 (June 28, 2016). Subsequently, the superior court granted Bank of America a writ of possession. Two years later, McSmith filed a motion for an out-of-time appeal. The superior court denied that motion, and McSmith filed this timely direct appeal. However, we lack jurisdiction for two reasons. First, out-of-time appeals are not available in civil cases. See Woodall v. Woodall, 248 Ga. 172, 172 (281 SE2d 619) (1981); Register v. Elliott, 285 Ga. App. 741, 744 (647 SE2d 406) (2007). Accordingly, the trial court’s order denying McSmith’s request for an out-of-time appeal is not subject to appellate review. Second, even if McSmith had a right to appellate review here, appeals from superior court decisions reviewing lower court decisions by certiorari or de novo proceedings must be initiated by filing an application for discretionary appeal. OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (1), (b); Bullock v. Sand, 260 Ga. App. 874, 875 (581 SE2d 333) (2003); see Rebich v. Miles, 264 Ga. 467, 469 (448 SE2d 192) (1994) (the underlying subject matter generally controls over relief sought in determining proper procedure to follow to appeal). “Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996). McSmith’s failure to file an application for discretionary review also deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 11/07/2019 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

Rebich v. Miles
448 S.E.2d 192 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1994)
Register v. Elliott
647 S.E.2d 406 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2007)
Woodall v. Woodall
281 S.E.2d 619 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1981)
Smoak v. Department of Human Resources
471 S.E.2d 60 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)
Bullock v. Sand
581 S.E.2d 333 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Derek Leroy McSmith v. Bank of America, N.A., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/derek-leroy-mcsmith-v-bank-of-america-na-gactapp-2019.