LORI PORTILLO v. BRAD RAFFENSPERGER

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMay 24, 2023
DocketA23A1510
StatusPublished

This text of LORI PORTILLO v. BRAD RAFFENSPERGER (LORI PORTILLO v. BRAD RAFFENSPERGER) 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
LORI PORTILLO v. BRAD RAFFENSPERGER, (Ga. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ May 24, 2023

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A23A1510. LORI PORTILLO v. BRAD RAFFENSPERGER et al.

The day after early voting began in the November 2022 general election, Lori Portillo filed a lawsuit against Brad Raffensperger and the Cherokee County Board of Elections, seeking declaratory judgment and injunctive relief regarding the use of the voting machines. On November 8, 2022 nunc pro tunc to November 7, 2022, the trial court entered an order denying Portillo’s lawsuit. Portillo filed a motion for reconsideration, which the trial court denied on March 1, 2023. On March 31, 2023, Portillo filed a notice of appeal in the Supreme Court of Georgia, which found no basis for its jurisdiction and transferred the appeal to this Court. See Case No. S23A0824 (April 20, 2023). We, however, also lack jurisdiction. A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of the entry of the appealable decision. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). “The proper and timely filing of a notice of appeal is an absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction upon an appellate court.” Perlman v. Perlman, 318 Ga. App. 731, 739 (4) (734 SE2d 560) (2012) (citation and punctuation omitted). Portillo’s failure to file a notice of appeal within 30 days of the entry of the trial court’s order dismissing her action deprives us of jurisdiction. Although Portillo filed her notice of appeal within 30 days of the order denying her motion for reconsideration, the denial of such a motion is not a directly appealable judgment and the filing of such a motion does not toll the time for filing a direct appeal. See Ferguson v. Freeman, 282 Ga. 180, 181 (1) (646 SE2d 65) (2007); Bell v. Cohran, 244 Ga. App. 510, 510 (536 SE2d 187) (2000). Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 05/24/2023 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

Ferguson v. Freeman
646 S.E.2d 65 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2007)
Bell v. Cohran
536 S.E.2d 187 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2000)
Perlman v. Perlman
734 S.E.2d 560 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
LORI PORTILLO v. BRAD RAFFENSPERGER, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lori-portillo-v-brad-raffensperger-gactapp-2023.