Jay Keene v. City of Warner Robins

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 8, 2025
DocketA26A0287
StatusPublished

This text of Jay Keene v. City of Warner Robins (Jay Keene v. City of Warner Robins) 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
Jay Keene v. City of Warner Robins, (Ga. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ September 08, 2025

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A26A0287. JAY KEENE v. CITY OF WARNER ROBINS.

On March 6, 2025, the trial court granted the City of Warner Robins’s motion for summary judgment in an action against it filed by Jay Keene. Thereafter, Keene filed a motion for reconsideration or, in the alternative, motion to vacate. The trial court denied the motion on August 20, 2025, and Keene filed his notice of appeal on August 25, 2025, seeking to appeal both the March 6 and August 20 orders. We, however, lack jurisdiction. A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of entry of the judgment or trial court order sought to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). The proper and timely filing of a notice of appeal is an absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction on this Court. Perlman v. Perlman, 318 Ga. App. 731, 739 (4) (734 SE2d 560) (2012). While the grant of summary judgment is subject to direct appeal, see OCGA § 9-11-56 (h), a motion for reconsideration does not extend the time for appealing the underlying order, and the denial of a motion for reconsideration is not appealable in its own right. See Bell v. Cohran, 244 Ga. App. 510, 510-511 (536 SE2d 187) (2000); Savage v. Newsome, 173 Ga. App. 271, 271 (326 SE2d 5) (1985). Consequently, Keene’s notice of appeal — filed 172 days after the trial court’s entry of summary judgment — is untimely as to that order. See OCGA § 5-6-38 (a); Bell, 244 Ga. App. at 510-511; Savage, 173 Ga. App. at 271. To the extent that the trial court treated the motion as a motion to vacate under OCGA § 9-11–60 (d), Keene has no right of direct appeal from that order. To obtain review of the trial court’s order denying his motion to vacate, Keene was required to comply with the discretionary appeal procedures of OCGA § 5-6-35 to obtain review. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (8); Jim Ellis Atlanta v. Adamson, 283 Ga. App. 116, 116 (640 SE2d 688) (2006). For these reasons, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 09/08/2025 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

Jim Ellis Atlanta, Inc. v. Adamson
640 S.E.2d 688 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2006)
Bell v. Cohran
536 S.E.2d 187 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2000)
Savage v. Newsome
326 S.E.2d 5 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1985)
Perlman v. Perlman
734 S.E.2d 560 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jay Keene v. City of Warner Robins, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jay-keene-v-city-of-warner-robins-gactapp-2025.