Girish Modi v. Greater Atlanta Telugu Association

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedOctober 11, 2022
DocketA23A0376
StatusPublished

This text of Girish Modi v. Greater Atlanta Telugu Association (Girish Modi v. Greater Atlanta Telugu Association) 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
Girish Modi v. Greater Atlanta Telugu Association, (Ga. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ October 11, 2022

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A23A0376. GIRISH MODI v. GREATER ATLANTA TELEGU ASSOCIATION.

On July 6, 2022, following a bench trial, the trial court granted final judgment in favor of defendant Greater Atlanta Telegu Association in this civil action. On July 11, plaintiff Girish Modi filed a notice of appeal. On August 5, Modi filed a motion to vacate the final judgment or for a new trial. Although that motion remains pending below, the trial court clerk transmitted the record to this Court at Modi’s insistence and the appeal has been docketed here. We, however, lack jurisdiction. Although the filing of a notice of appeal generally divests the trial court of jurisdiction, “such divestiture does not become effective during the period in which a motion for new trial may be filed. In the event a motion for new trial is timely filed as provided in OCGA § 5-5-40 . . ., the effectiveness of the divestiture of jurisdiction is then delayed until the motion for new trial is ruled upon and a notice of appeal to the ruling has been filed or the period for appealing the ruling has expired.” Housing Auth. of City of Atlanta v. Geeter, 252 Ga. 196, 197 (312 SE2d 309) (1984). Thus, the trial court retains jurisdiction to rule on Modi’s pending motion for new trial. Under these circumstances, Modi was required to comply with the interlocutory appeal procedures of OCGA § 5-6-34 (b), including obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the trial court, to appeal the judgment. See Home Ins. Co. v. Fort Valley Mills, 132 Ga. App. 15, 16 (207 SE2d 590) (1974); accord Auld v. Weaver, 196 Ga. App. 782, 782-783 (397 SE2d 51) (1990). Modi’s failure to comply with the interlocutory appeal procedures deprives us of jurisdiction over this premature direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Home Ins. Co., 132 Ga. App. at 16. If the trial court denies Modi’s motion for new trial, he may file another notice of appeal within 30 days of that ruling.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 10/11/2022 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

HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ATLANTA v. Geter
312 S.E.2d 309 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1984)
Auld v. Weaver
397 S.E.2d 51 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Home Insurance v. Fort Valley Mills, Inc.
207 S.E.2d 590 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Girish Modi v. Greater Atlanta Telugu Association, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/girish-modi-v-greater-atlanta-telugu-association-gactapp-2022.