Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Frazier v. Merritt

Frazier v. Merritt

380 S.E.2d 495, 190 Ga. App. 832, 1989 Ga. App. LEXIS 436
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 8, 1989
DocketA89A0373
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 380 S.E.2d 495 (Frazier v. Merritt) 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
Frazier v. Merritt, 380 S.E.2d 495, 190 Ga. App. 832, 1989 Ga. App. LEXIS 436 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989).

Opinion

Banke, Presiding Judge.

The appellant, acting pro se, sued the appellee attorney for alleged legal malpractice arising from his representation of the appellant on certain criminal charges. Contemporaneously with the filing of his answer, the appellee moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it was not accompanied by the supporting affidavit of an expert as required by OCGA § 9-11-9.1 (a). The trial court granted the motion, and this appeal followed. Held:

1. The trial court did not err in refusing to appoint counsel to represent the appellant in the action. “[T]his being a civil proceeding, [the appellant], though indigent, was not entitled to have . . . appointed counsel. . . .” Crawford v. Linahan, 243 Ga. 161, 165 (253 SE2d 171) (1979).

2. The trial court did not err in granting the appellee’s motion to dismiss. Accord Barr v. Johnson, 189 Ga. App. 136 (375 SE2d 51) (1988). Compare Glaser v. Meck, 258 Ga. 468 (369 SE2d 912) (1988) (holding that the defendant was estopped from moving to dismiss a malpractice action based on the failure to file the required affidavit where he waited until after the statute of limitation had run to assert *833 the defect). The appellant’s constitutional attack upon OCGA § 9-11-9.1 presents nothing for review, inasmuch as he has failed to specify in what respect the statute is deemed to be violative of the constitution. See DeKalb County v. Post Properties, 245 Ga. 214 (1), 218 (263 SE2d 905) (1980).

Decided March 8, 1989 Rehearing denied March 20, 1989. James Frazier, pro se. Lorenzo C. Merritt, Michael J. Classens, Francis W. Allen, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Sognier and Pope, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Mingledorff v. Stokely
477 S.E.2d 374 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)
ABE Engineering, Inc. v. Griffin, Cochran & Marshall
443 S.E.2d 1 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1994)
Lutz v. Foran
427 S.E.2d 248 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1993)
Gillis v. Goodgame
404 S.E.2d 815 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1991)
Hill-Everett v. Jones
399 S.E.2d 739 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
McLendon & Cox v. Roberts
398 S.E.2d 579 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Kneip v. Southern Engineering Co.
395 S.E.2d 809 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1990)
Kalustian v. McDonald
390 S.E.2d 657 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Housing Auth. of Savannah v. Greene
383 S.E.2d 867 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
380 S.E.2d 495, 190 Ga. App. 832, 1989 Ga. App. LEXIS 436, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frazier-v-merritt-gactapp-1989.