Nick H. H. Stewart v. Caterpillar, Inc.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 30, 2017
DocketA17A1342
StatusPublished

This text of Nick H. H. Stewart v. Caterpillar, Inc. (Nick H. H. Stewart v. Caterpillar, 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
Nick H. H. Stewart v. Caterpillar, Inc., (Ga. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ March 30, 2017

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17A1341, A17A1342. NICK H. H. STEWART v. CATERPILLAR, INC. et al.

Nick H. H. Stewart filed a complaint against 18 defendants. In June 2016, the trial court entered separate orders dismissing the complaint as to seven defendants. Stewart filed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court, which transferred the matter here. That appeal has been docketed here as Case No. A17A1341. In September 2016, the trial court entered a single order dismissing the complaint as to nine defendants. Stewart filed another notice of appeal to the Supreme Court, which transferred the matter here. That appeal has been docketed here as Case No. A17A1342. We lack jurisdiction in both cases. In cases involving multiple parties or multiple claims, a decision adjudicating fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of less than all the parties is not a final judgment. See Shoenthal v. Shoenthal, 333 Ga. App. 729, 730 (776 SE2d 663) (2015). “In such circumstances, there must be an express determination under OCGA § 9-11-54 (b) or there must be compliance with the interlocutory appeal requirements of OCGA § 5-6-34 (b).” Johnson v. Hosp. Corp. of Am., 192 Ga. App. 628, 629 (385 SE2d 731) (1989) (citation and punctuation omitted). Where neither of these code sections is followed, the appeal is premature and must be dismissed. Id. Here, the trial court’s dismissal orders did not address Stewart’s claims against two defendants, Caterpillar Leicester, U. K., Ltd. and J. P. Morgan Chase, and thus they were not final orders. Moreover, the trial court did not direct the entry of final judgment in accordance with OCGA § 9-11-54 (b). Under these circumstances, Stewart could appeal the orders only by following the interlocutory appeal procedure set forth in OCGA § 5-6-34 (b). See Johnson, supra. His failure to follow that procedure deprives us of jurisdiction over these direct appeals, which are hereby DISMISSED. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 03/30/2017 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

Johnson v. Hospital Corporation of America
385 S.E.2d 731 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
Shoenthal v. Shoenthal
776 S.E.2d 663 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Nick H. H. Stewart v. Caterpillar, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nick-h-h-stewart-v-caterpillar-inc-gactapp-2017.