Marjorie Underwood Talevski v. Courtney Renee Young
This text of Marjorie Underwood Talevski v. Courtney Renee Young (Marjorie Underwood Talevski v. Courtney Renee Young) 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.
Opinion
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA,__________________ July 12, 2013
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
A13D0428. MARJORIE UNDERWOOD TALEVSKI v. COURTNEY RENEE YOUNG et al.
Following a jury trial, Marjorie Underwood Talevski won a judgment against Courtney Renee Young and others in this tort action. Tavelski contends that the judgment has not been fully satisfied. She initiated post-judgment discovery, which the defendants attempted to stop. The trial court entered various orders, including a protective order, an entry of satisfaction of judgment, and a “final order.” From those orders, Talevski filed a notice of appeal as well as this application for discretionary appeal. Although post-judgment discovery orders must be appealed by the interlocutory appeal procedure when they are non-final, see Cornelius v. Finley, 204 Ga. App. 299 (418 SE2d 815) (1992), the orders at issue here appear to be final within the meaning of OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1). Moreover, no provision of OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) appears to apply.1 Ordinarily, we will grant a timely application when the lower court’s order is subject to direct appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (j). In this case, however, Talevski has already filed a notice of appeal. Accordingly, this application is superfluous, and it is therefore DISMISSED.
1 One of the orders that Talevski seeks to appeal, the denial of a motion to set aside, appears to fall within OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (8). But that order is directly appealable here in conjunction with Talevski’s appeal of the other final orders that are not subject to the discretionary appeal procedure. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (d); Bocker v. Crisp, 313 Ga. App. 585, 588 n. 9 (722 SE2d 186) (2012). Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 07/12/2013 Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,__________________ 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Marjorie Underwood Talevski v. Courtney Renee Young, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marjorie-underwood-talevski-v-courtney-renee-young-gactapp-2013.