Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Georgia Department of Human Resources v. Patillo

Georgia Department of Human Resources v. Patillo

390 S.E.2d 431, 194 Ga. App. 279, 1990 Ga. App. LEXIS 65
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 22, 1990
DocketA89A1603
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 390 S.E.2d 431 (Georgia Department of Human Resources v. Patillo) 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
Georgia Department of Human Resources v. Patillo, 390 S.E.2d 431, 194 Ga. App. 279, 1990 Ga. App. LEXIS 65 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

Beasley, Judge.

Georgia Department of Human Resources appeals from the order of the trial court dismissing its appeal for failure to obtain the timely filing of a trial transcript.

“The provision authorizing the trial court to dismiss an appeal [OCGA § 5-6-48 (c)] specifies that two elements must be present: One is that the delay was unreasonable and the other is that the unreasonable delay was inexcusable. In passing upon these issues, the trial court has discretion; however, it is a legal discretion which is subject to review in the appellate courts.” Young v. Climatrol &c. Corp., 237 Ga. 53, 55 (226 SE2d 737) (1976); Glen Restaurants v. Bldg. 5 Assoc., 189 Ga. App. 327 (2) (375 SE2d 492) (1988).

Both sides have supplied numerous record and legal citations regarding what facts constitute an unreasonable and inexcusable delay, but the crucial point is that the trial court must make such findings before we may determine whether it abused its discretion. See Baker v. Southern R. Co., 192 Ga. App. 444, 445 (385 SE2d 125) (1989); City of College Park v. Ga. Power Co., 188 Ga. App. 223, 224 (372 SE2d 493) (1988). The final order merely granted the motion to dismiss, and the court did not orally state any findings at the conclusion of the hearing. The failure to ascertain the reasonableness and excusableness of the delay mandates a reversal of the order and a remand with instruction that findings be made on these issues. Speir v. Nicholson, 193 Ga. App. 444 (388 SE2d 42) (1989). See White v. Olderman Realty &c. Co., 163 Ga. App. 57, 58 (293 SE2d 726) (1982).

Judgment reversed and case remanded with instruction.

Carley, C. J., and McMurray, P. J., concur. *280 tive Assistant Attorney General, Stephanie B. Manis, Deputy Attorney General, William C. Joy, Senior Assistant Attorney General, William M. Droze, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant. Daniel J. Craig, for appellee.

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

Related

Technology Square, LLC v. Fulton County Board of Tax Assessors
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2021
Crandall Postell v. Alfa Insurance Corporation
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2014
Postell v. Alfa Insurance
757 S.E.2d 661 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2014)
Grant v. KOOBY
713 S.E.2d 685 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2011)
Hewett v. Raytheon Aircraft Co.
614 S.E.2d 875 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2005)
Rogers v. Norris
586 S.E.2d 747 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2003)
Wilson v. State
554 S.E.2d 522 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2001)
Rahman v. Dalkon Shield Trust
532 S.E.2d 699 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2000)
Wood v. Notte
519 S.E.2d 923 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1999)
Langston v. State
426 S.E.2d 609 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
McClure v. State
421 S.E.2d 121 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Crenshaw v. Georgia Underwriting Ass'n
414 S.E.2d 915 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Edwards v. Everett
410 S.E.2d 205 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1991)
Department of Human Resources v. Pattilo
397 S.E.2d 47 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
390 S.E.2d 431, 194 Ga. App. 279, 1990 Ga. App. LEXIS 65, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/georgia-department-of-human-resources-v-patillo-gactapp-1990.