EDWARD VANCE TALLON, II v. SHAWNA TALLON

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 18, 2025
DocketA25A1169
StatusPublished

This text of EDWARD VANCE TALLON, II v. SHAWNA TALLON (EDWARD VANCE TALLON, II v. SHAWNA TALLON) 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
EDWARD VANCE TALLON, II v. SHAWNA TALLON, (Ga. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ February 18, 2025

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A25A1169. EDWARD VANCE TALLON II v. SHAWNA TALLON et al.

After the Morgan County Probate Court sustained a caveat to a will filed by Shawna Tallon, Edward Vance Tallon II filed a petition for review in superior court. On August 8, 2024, just prior to the bench trial, the superior court dismissed the petition based on Edward’s failure to add indispensable parties as previously ordered. Edward filed a motion for new trial from the dismissal order, which the trial court dismissed. Edward filed this appeal on November 22, 2024. We, however, lack jurisdiction. A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of entry of the judgment or trial court order sought to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). The proper and timely filing of a notice of appeal is an absolute requirement to confer appellate jurisdiction on this Court. Perlman v. Perlman, 318 Ga. App. 731, 739 (4) (734 SE2d 560) (2012). Edward did not file a notice of appeal within 30 days of the August 8 dismissal order; he filed a motion for new trial instead. A properly filed motion for a new trial extends the time for filing a notice of appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). But a motion that merely challenges a court’s legal conclusions — regardless of nomenclature — is not a proper motion for a new trial and thus does not extend the time to appeal. Bank South Mtg. v. Starr, 208 Ga. App. 19, 19-20 (429 SE2d 700) (1993). Here, Edward’s motion, which challenged the trial court’s dismissal, was not a proper motion for new trial. See Luster v. Bank of America, 331 Ga. App. 510, 511-512 (769 SE2d 394) (2015). Because Edward’s motion for new trial was not the appropriate vehicle for challenging the trial court’s dismissal, it did not operate to extend the time in which to file an appeal. As no timely notice of appeal was filed, we lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/18/2025 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

BANK SOUTH MORTGAGE, INC. v. Starr
429 S.E.2d 700 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1993)
Perlman v. Perlman
734 S.E.2d 560 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012)
Luster v. Bank of America, N.A.
769 S.E.2d 394 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
EDWARD VANCE TALLON, II v. SHAWNA TALLON, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edward-vance-tallon-ii-v-shawna-tallon-gactapp-2025.