Eiser International, LLC v. McCmit, LLC
This text of Eiser International, LLC v. McCmit, LLC (Eiser International, LLC v. McCmit, LLC) 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.
Opinion
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA,____________________ November 28, 2022
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
A23D0107. EISER INTERNATIONAL, LLC v. MCCMIT, LLC.
Following a voluntary dismissal, Eiser International, LLC brought a renewed petition for writ of certiorari of a magistrate court order pursuant to OCGA § 9-2-61. The superior court subsequently entered an order requiring Eiser to satisfy the provisions of OCGA § 5-4-5 by filing a certificate from the magistrate court that all costs have been paid and by posting a bond in the amount of $49,845.08. The superior court further stated that the failure to comply with the terms of its order would result in the dismissal of the renewed action with prejudice. Eiser then filed this application for discretionary appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction. The order Eiser seeks to appeal is not a final judgment as the case remains pending in the superior court. Consequently, Eiser was required to comply with the interlocutory appeal procedures of OCGA § 5-6-34 (b), which include obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the superior court, to obtain appellate review. See Carter v. Landel/Arundel, Inc., 172 Ga. App. 115, 116 (3) (322 SE2d 108) (1984). Although Eiser filed an application for discretionary appeal, as described in OCGA § 5-6-35, compliance with that procedure does not excuse a party seeking appellate review of an interlocutory order from complying with the additional requirements of OCGA § 5-6-34 (b). See Bailey v. Bailey, 266 Ga. 832, 832-833 (471 SE2d 213) (1996); see also Scruggs v. Ga. Dept. of Human Resources, 261 Ga. 587, 589 (1) (408 SE2d 103) (1991) (discretionary application statute does not relieve applicant who seeks to appeal interlocutory order from complying with interlocutory review requirements). Eiser’s failure to comply with the interlocutory appeal procedures deprives us of jurisdiction over this application, which is hereby DISMISSED.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 11/28/2022 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Eiser International, LLC v. McCmit, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eiser-international-llc-v-mccmit-llc-gactapp-2022.