Jaraysi v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.

335 S.E.2d 463, 176 Ga. App. 105, 1985 Ga. App. LEXIS 2290
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 19, 1985
Docket70892
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 335 S.E.2d 463 (Jaraysi v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.) 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
Jaraysi v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., 335 S.E.2d 463, 176 Ga. App. 105, 1985 Ga. App. LEXIS 2290 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

Sognier, Judge.

Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Company (Southern Bell) brought this action against Sammy Jaraysi, d/b/a Greenthumb Landscaping (Jaraysi), seeking $617.12 as the alleged balance due on an open account. On May 18, 1983, the trial court granted Southern Bell’s motion for summary judgment, to which Jaraysi had failed to respond, and ordered judgment in Southern Bell’s favor in the amount of $708.83. Jaraysi did not appeal from the grant of summary judgment against him but, on December 2, 1983, filed a motion to set aside the judgment pursuant to OCGA § 9-11-60 (d). The trial court on June 29, 1984 denied Jaraysi’s motion and Jaraysi filed a direct appeal to this court.

OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (8), as amended effective July 1, 1984, requires that an application for discretionary review be filed where a party appeals “from orders under subsection (d) of Code Section 9-11-60 denying a motion to set aside a judgment or under subsection (e) of Code Section 9-11-60 denying relief upon a complaint in equity to set aside a judgment.” The instant appeal was filed July 26, 1984 from an order denying appellant’s motion to set aside the judgment under OCGA § 9-11-60 (d). It is, therefore, subject to dismissal because no attempt was made to comply with the provisions of OCGA § 5-6-35.

This appeal must also be dismissed because OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) [106]*106(6), as amended effective July 1, 1984, requires that an application for discretionary review be filed when the amount placed in controversy by the claimant is $2,500 or less. Brown v. Assoc. Fin. Svcs. Corp., 175 Ga. App. 553 (333 SE2d 888) (1985).

Decided September 19, 1985. Theodore L. Marcus, for appellant. John L. Skelton, Jr., for appellee.

Appeal dismissed.

Birdsong, P. J., and Carley, J., concur.

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

Related

Okekpe v. Commerce Funding Corp.
463 S.E.2d 23 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1995)
Leader National Insurance v. Martin
363 S.E.2d 281 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
335 S.E.2d 463, 176 Ga. App. 105, 1985 Ga. App. LEXIS 2290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jaraysi-v-southern-bell-telephone-telegraph-co-gactapp-1985.