Eades v. Keinonen

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Eades v. Keinonen

243 S.E.2d 574, 145 Ga. App. 271, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 1945

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 16, 1978

Docket54959

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 243 S.E.2d 574 (Eades v. Keinonen) 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

Eades v. Keinonen, 243 S.E.2d 574, 145 Ga. App. 271, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 1945 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Quiluan, Presiding Judge.

The record reveals that the judgment questioned by this appeal was entered on November 4, 1976. The trial judge had issued a rule nisi on the motion for new trial on December 6, 1976, but the motion was not filed until December 7, 1976. Appeal was taken on August 9, 1977 after the overruling of appellant’s motion for new trial on July 29,1977. "It is essential to the validity of a motion for a new trial that it should be filed with the clerk of the trial court within the time prescribed by law; and a motion which has not been so filed should be dismissed, notwithstanding the judge before whom the case is tried may have granted a rule nisi during the term and within the time fixed by law for filing the motion.” Peavy v. Peavy, 167 Ga. 219 (1) (145 SE 55).

Since a timely filed motion for new trial was a prerequisite to the validity of the appeal, the failure to file such motion within the prescribed time subjects the appeal to appellee’s motion to dismiss. Venable v. Block, 141 Ga. App. 523 (233 SE2d 878).

Appeal dismissed.

Webb and McMurray, JJ., concur.

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

Quiluan, Presiding Judge.

The record reveals that the judgment questioned by this appeal was entered on November 4, 1976. The trial judge had issued a rule nisi on the motion for new trial on December 6, 1976, but the motion was not filed until December 7, 1976. Appeal was taken on August 9, 1977 after the overruling of appellant’s motion for new trial on July 29,1977. "It is essential to the validity of a motion for a new trial that it should be filed with the clerk of the trial court within the time prescribed by law; and a motion which has not been so filed should be dismissed, notwithstanding the judge before whom the case is tried may have granted a rule nisi during the term and within the time fixed by law for filing the motion.” Peavy v. Peavy, 167 Ga. 219 (1) (145 SE 55).

Since a timely filed motion for new trial was a prerequisite to the validity of the appeal, the failure to file such motion within the prescribed time subjects the appeal to appellee’s motion to dismiss. Venable v. Block, 141 Ga. App. 523 (233 SE2d 878).

Appeal dismissed.

Webb and McMurray, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 S.E.2d 574, 145 Ga. App. 271, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 1945, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eades-v-keinonen-gactapp-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack