Michelle Barnett v. Hiram Police Department
This text of Michelle Barnett v. Hiram Police Department (Michelle Barnett v. Hiram Police Department) 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,____________________ March 22, 2018
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
A18A1273. MICHELLE BARNETT v. DAVID MECKLIN, JUDGE. A18A1274. MICHELLE BARNETT v. CHAD PLUMLEY, JUDGE. A18A1275. MICHELLE BARNETT v. HIRAM POLICE DEPARTMENT.
Following adverse rulings in the magistrate court of Paulding County, Michelle Barnett appealed to the Paulding County Superior Court. In one case, subsequently appealed and docketed here as Case No. A18A1273, Barnett appealed the dismissal of her pro se claim seeking declaratory relief against David Mecklin, a sitting judge in the Municipal Court of Hiram, Georgia. In another case, subsequently appealed and docketed here as Case No. A18A1274, Barnett appealed the dismissal of her pro se claim against Hiram Municipal Court Judge Chad Plumley based on his alleged introduction of a “fraudlent document” in her court proceedings. In a third case, subsequently appealed and docketed here as Case No. A18A1275, Barnett appealed the dismissal of her tortious conduct claim against the Hiram Police Department. In three separate orders, all of which were entered on August 11, 2017, the superior court dismissed all three appeals. Barnett filed direct appeals from all three orders on September 13, 2017. We lack jurisdiction for two reasons. First, a direct appeal is not authorized here. A party seeking to appeal a superior court order reviewing a magistrate court decision must file an application for discretionary appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (1); Bullock v. Sand, 260 Ga. App. 874, 875 (581 SE2d 333) (2003). Barnett failed to follow the proper appellate procedure to appeal these cases. Second, even if a direct appeal was authorized, these appeals are untimely. A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of the entry of the order sought to be appealed. See 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.” Couch v. United Paperworkers Intl. Union, 224 Ga. App. 721 (482 SE2d 704) (1997) (punctuation omitted). Here, Barnett filed her notices of appeal 33 days after entry of the superior court’s orders. Although the Paulding County Superior Court was closed on September 11, 2017 due to Hurricane Irma, the court was open on September 12, 2017. Barnett, however, did not file her notices of appeal until September 13, 2017. For these reasons, these appeals are hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 03/22/2018 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
Michelle Barnett v. Hiram Police Department, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michelle-barnett-v-hiram-police-department-gactapp-2018.