Natasha Van Holten v. Anthony Berry

• Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
• Decided: September 24, 2024
• Docket: A25A0308
• Status: Published

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ September 24, 2024

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A25A0308. NATASHA VAN HOLTEN v. ANTHONY BERRY.

This case began as a dispossessory proceeding in magistrate court. Following an adverse ruling, defendant Natasha Van Holten filed a petition for review with the superior court. Following an adverse ruling in the superior court, Van Holten initiated this direct appeal by filing a notice of appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction. Appeals from superior court decisions reviewing lower court decisions by petitions for review must be initiated by filing an application for discretionary review. OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (1), (b); Bullock v. Sand, 260 Ga. App. 874, 875 (581 SE2d 333) (2003). “Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996). Because this case involves an appeal from magistrate court to superior court, Van Holten has no right to a direct appeal here. See Bullock, 260 Ga. App. at 875. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 09/24/2024 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.