Kari Samuelson, as Successor of the Estate of Alan Dickinson v. Vincent Dawson

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Kari Samuelson, as Successor of the Estate of Alan Dickinson v. Vincent Dawson

DecidedFebruary 11, 2019

DocketA19A0992

StatusPublished

This text of Kari Samuelson, as Successor of the Estate of Alan Dickinson v. Vincent Dawson (Kari Samuelson, as Successor of the Estate of Alan Dickinson v. Vincent Dawson) 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

Kari Samuelson, as Successor of the Estate of Alan Dickinson v. Vincent Dawson, (Ga. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ February 04, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19A0992. KARI SAMUELSON, AS SUCCESSOR EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF ALAN DICKINSON v. VINCENT DAWSON.

Kari Samuelson, as Successor Executor of the Estate of Alan Dickinson, filed this direct appeal from the superior court’s order granting a motion filed by Vincent Dawson to enforce a settlement agreement. In that motion, Dawson also sought an award of attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11. The superior court’s order reserved the issue of attorney fees. We lack jurisdiction. “Generally, an order is final and appealable when it leaves no issues remaining to be resolved, constitutes the court’s final ruling on the merits of the action, and leaves the parties with no further recourse in the trial court.” Thomas v. Douglas County, 217 Ga. App. 520, 522 (1) (457 SE2d 835) (1995); see also OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1). Here, in the order granting Dawson’s motion to enforce the settlement agreement, the superior court specifically reserved ruling on the request for attorney fees, which leaves the case pending below. See CitiFinancial Svcs., Inc. v. Holland, 310 Ga. App. 480, 481 (713 SE2d 678) (2011). Samuelson therefore was required to use the interlocutory appeal procedures – including obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the trial court – to appeal the superior court’s order. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (b); Miller v. Miller, 282 Ga. 164, 164-165 (646 SE2d 469) (2007); CitiFinancial Svcs., Inc., 310 Ga. App. at 481. Her failure to do so deprives us of jurisdiction over this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Bailey v. Bailey, 266 Ga. 832, 833 (471 SE2d 213) (1996).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/04/2019 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,____________________ February 04, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19A0992. KARI SAMUELSON, AS SUCCESSOR EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF ALAN DICKINSON v. VINCENT DAWSON.

Kari Samuelson, as Successor Executor of the Estate of Alan Dickinson, filed this direct appeal from the superior court’s order granting a motion filed by Vincent Dawson to enforce a settlement agreement. In that motion, Dawson also sought an award of attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11. The superior court’s order reserved the issue of attorney fees. We lack jurisdiction. “Generally, an order is final and appealable when it leaves no issues remaining to be resolved, constitutes the court’s final ruling on the merits of the action, and leaves the parties with no further recourse in the trial court.” Thomas v. Douglas County, 217 Ga. App. 520, 522 (1) (457 SE2d 835) (1995); see also OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1). Here, in the order granting Dawson’s motion to enforce the settlement agreement, the superior court specifically reserved ruling on the request for attorney fees, which leaves the case pending below. See CitiFinancial Svcs., Inc. v. Holland, 310 Ga. App. 480, 481 (713 SE2d 678) (2011). Samuelson therefore was required to use the interlocutory appeal procedures – including obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the trial court – to appeal the superior court’s order. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (b); Miller v. Miller, 282 Ga. 164, 164-165 (646 SE2d 469) (2007); CitiFinancial Svcs., Inc., 310 Ga. App. at 481. Her failure to do so deprives us of jurisdiction over this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Bailey v. Bailey, 266 Ga. 832, 833 (471 SE2d 213) (1996).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/04/2019 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)

Kari Samuelson, as Successor of the Estate of Alan Dickinson v. Vincent Dawson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kari-samuelson-as-successor-of-the-estate-of-alan-dickinson-v-vincent-gactapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack