HAKIM ABDULLAH v. SAINT JOHN MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH

Court of Appeals of Georgia

HAKIM ABDULLAH v. SAINT JOHN MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH

DecidedOctober 8, 2021

DocketA22A0180

StatusPublished

This text of HAKIM ABDULLAH v. SAINT JOHN MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH (HAKIM ABDULLAH v. SAINT JOHN MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH) 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

HAKIM ABDULLAH v. SAINT JOHN MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH, (Ga. Ct. App. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ September 28, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A22A0180. HAKIM ABDULLAH v. SAINT JOHN MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH et al.

Hakim Abdullah, plaintiff in the defamation action below, appeals from an order of the Superior Court of Camden County transferring the case from one judge on that court to a different judge on the same court. The order, however, is not subject to direct appeal. “Georgia law is well settled that the right to appeal is not constitutional, but instead depends on statutory authority.” Duke v. State, 306 Ga. 171, 172 (1) (829 SE2d 348) (2019) (punctuation omitted). Under OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1), appeal may be taken from a final judgment “where the case is no longer pending in the court below[.]” If the case remains pending, compliance with the interlocutory appeal procedure is generally required. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (b); Duke, 306 Ga. at 172. Because the case remains pending below, there was no final judgment as defined in OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1). See Eidson v. Croutch, 337 Ga. App. 542, 544 (788 SE2d 129) (2016) (transfer order is not a final judgment as the case is still pending below, such that interlocutory appeal procedure is required). Consequently, Abdullah was required to comply with the interlocutory appeal procedure in order to appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (b); see generally In the Interest of W. L., 335 Ga. App. 561, 562 (782 SE2d 464) (2016) (order transferring case from one juvenile court to another is not final and is thus subject to interlocutory appeal procedure, as the transfer is a continuation of the same proceeding against the defendant). Abdullah’s failure to follow the requisite procedure deprives us of jurisdiction to consider this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Eidson, 337 Ga. App. at 543.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 09/28/2021 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

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ September 28, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A22A0180. HAKIM ABDULLAH v. SAINT JOHN MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH et al.

Hakim Abdullah, plaintiff in the defamation action below, appeals from an order of the Superior Court of Camden County transferring the case from one judge on that court to a different judge on the same court. The order, however, is not subject to direct appeal. “Georgia law is well settled that the right to appeal is not constitutional, but instead depends on statutory authority.” Duke v. State, 306 Ga. 171, 172 (1) (829 SE2d 348) (2019) (punctuation omitted). Under OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1), appeal may be taken from a final judgment “where the case is no longer pending in the court below[.]” If the case remains pending, compliance with the interlocutory appeal procedure is generally required. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (b); Duke, 306 Ga. at 172. Because the case remains pending below, there was no final judgment as defined in OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1). See Eidson v. Croutch, 337 Ga. App. 542, 544 (788 SE2d 129) (2016) (transfer order is not a final judgment as the case is still pending below, such that interlocutory appeal procedure is required). Consequently, Abdullah was required to comply with the interlocutory appeal procedure in order to appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (b); see generally In the Interest of W. L., 335 Ga. App. 561, 562 (782 SE2d 464) (2016) (order transferring case from one juvenile court to another is not final and is thus subject to interlocutory appeal procedure, as the transfer is a continuation of the same proceeding against the defendant). Abdullah’s failure to follow the requisite procedure deprives us of jurisdiction to consider this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Eidson, 337 Ga. App. at 543.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 09/28/2021 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

HAKIM ABDULLAH v. SAINT JOHN MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hakim-abdullah-v-saint-john-missionary-baptist-church-gactapp-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack