Drake v. Clutter

391 S.E.2d 473, 194 Ga. App. 644, 1990 Ga. App. LEXIS 279
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 23, 1990
DocketA90A0053
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 391 S.E.2d 473 (Drake v. Clutter) 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
Drake v. Clutter, 391 S.E.2d 473, 194 Ga. App. 644, 1990 Ga. App. LEXIS 279 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

Banke, Presiding Judge.

The appellant, Paul Drake, filed suit against the appellee, Tracy Clutter, seeking to recover possession of a Ford Mustang automobile. At the conclusion of a non-jury trial, the trial court found that Glut *645 ter was entitled to possession of the vehicle but ordered her to make regular lease payments to the appellant. The court entered its judgment on July 13, 1989, and on July 20, 1989, entered findings of fact and conclusions of law as an addendum to the judgment. The appellant filed a motion for new trial on July 27, 1989, and a hearing was scheduled on the motion for September 11, 1989. However, on September 7, 1989, prior to the scheduled hearing date, the appellant filed a notice of appeal. On September 11, 1989, the trial court dismissed the motion for new trial on the ground that it had lost jurisdiction of the case because of the filing of the notice of appeal. No appeal was taken from the latter order. Held:

Decided February 23, 1990. Oxendine & Associates, John W. Oxendine, for appellant. Tracy Clutter, pro se. Richardson, Chenggis & Constantinides, George G. Chenggis, for appellee.

In Dept. of Transp. v. Rudeseal, 148 Ga. App. 179, 180 (251 SE2d 11) (1978), we held that “ ‘[a] notice of appeal from the judgment, filed while a motion for new trial is pending, and unaccompanied by a proper certificate for immediate review, confers no jurisdiction in the appellate court and results in a dismissal of the appeal.’ ” While it follows that the trial court was mistaken in its conclusion that it had lost jurisdiction to rule on the motion for new trial in the present case, it also follows that we are without jurisdiction to consider the present appeal.

Appeal dismissed.

Birdsong and Cooper, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Amorwanda Campbell v. Lester Campbell
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2022
Danny Ray Dunn v. Caryn Alissa Dunn
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2022
Davey E. Wright v. Joane M. Tape
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2021
Dante Hayward v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2021
Ryan Brown v. Julianna Hamil
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2020
Todd M. O'Brien v. Jennifer J. Lewis
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2018
Hann v. State
665 S.E.2d 731 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
391 S.E.2d 473, 194 Ga. App. 644, 1990 Ga. App. LEXIS 279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/drake-v-clutter-gactapp-1990.