Nc Construction Company v. Action Mobilplatform, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Nc Construction Company v. Action Mobilplatform, Inc.

370 S.E.2d 800, 187 Ga. App. 507, 1988 Ga. App. LEXIS 750

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 10, 1988

Docket76968

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 370 S.E.2d 800 (Nc Construction Company v. Action Mobilplatform, Inc.) 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

Nc Construction Company v. Action Mobilplatform, Inc., 370 S.E.2d 800, 187 Ga. App. 507, 1988 Ga. App. LEXIS 750 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Banke, Presiding Judge.

A default judgment was entered against the appellant in this case on March 5, 1987, based on a determination that its answer was not legally sufficient. The present appeal is from an order dated November 11, 1987, denying the appellant’s “Motion for Reconsideration or in the Alternative ... To Dismiss a Void Judgment.” Held:

It is well settled that neither a motion for reconsideration of a final judgment nor a motion to set aside a final judgment extends the time for filing a notice of appeal. See, e.g., Austin v. Carter, 248 Ga. 775, 776 (1) (285 SE2d 542) (1982). While the denial of a motion to set aside may be considered appealable in its own right where the motion is filed pursuant to OCGA § 9-11-60 (d), the right of appeal is conditioned, under such circumstances, upon compliance with the application procedures set forth in OCGA § 5-6-35. No application for appeal having been filed in the present case, it follows that the appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Appeal dismissed.

Birdsong, C. J., and Beasley, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Banke, Presiding Judge.

A default judgment was entered against the appellant in this case on March 5, 1987, based on a determination that its answer was not legally sufficient. The present appeal is from an order dated November 11, 1987, denying the appellant’s “Motion for Reconsideration or in the Alternative ... To Dismiss a Void Judgment.” Held:

It is well settled that neither a motion for reconsideration of a final judgment nor a motion to set aside a final judgment extends the time for filing a notice of appeal. See, e.g., Austin v. Carter, 248 Ga. 775, 776 (1) (285 SE2d 542) (1982). While the denial of a motion to set aside may be considered appealable in its own right where the motion is filed pursuant to OCGA § 9-11-60 (d), the right of appeal is conditioned, under such circumstances, upon compliance with the application procedures set forth in OCGA § 5-6-35. No application for appeal having been filed in the present case, it follows that the appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Appeal dismissed.

Birdsong, C. J., and Beasley, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

370 S.E.2d 800, 187 Ga. App. 507, 1988 Ga. App. LEXIS 750, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nc-construction-company-v-action-mobilplatform-inc-gactapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack