Rashida Strober v. Thomas Harris

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedDecember 14, 2020
DocketA21D0107
StatusPublished

This text of Rashida Strober v. Thomas Harris (Rashida Strober v. Thomas Harris) 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
Rashida Strober v. Thomas Harris, (Ga. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ November 25, 2020

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A21D0107. RASHIDA STROBER v. THOMAS HARRIS.

On October 27, 2020, Rashida Strober filed this pro se application for discretionary appeal, seeking to appeal the trial court’s August 27, 2020 order dismissing a temporary protective order. We, however, lack jurisdiction. Because this action does not appear to have been brought under the Family Violence Act,1 Strober appears to have a right of direct appeal because a party may file a direct appeal from a protective order that was entered in an action brought under the general stalking statute. See, e.g., Sinclair v. Daly, 295 Ga. App. 613 (672 SE2d 672) (2009) (reversing on direct appeal a stalking protective order entered under OCGA § 16-5-94); Pilcher v. Stribling, 282 Ga. 166 (647 SE2d 8) (2007) (same). This Court ordinarily will grant an application for discretionary review of a directly appealable order under OCGA § 5-6-35 (j). To fall within this general rule, however, the application must be filed within 30 days of entry of the order or judgment sought to be appealed. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (d), (j). The requirements of OCGA § 5-6-35 are jurisdictional, and this Court cannot accept an application for appeal not made in compliance therewith. See Boyle v. State, 190 Ga. App. 734, 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989). Strober’s application is untimely, as it was filed 61 days after

1 A party must file an application for discretionary appeal to obtain review of a protective order that was entered in an action brought under the Family Violence Act, because such cases are domestic relations cases within the meaning of OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2). See Schmidt v. Schmidt, 270 Ga. 461, 461-462 (1) (510 SE2d 810) (1999). entry of the order she seeks to appeal. Accordingly, this application is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 11/25/2020 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

Boyle v. State of Georgia
380 S.E.2d 57 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
Schmidt v. Schmidt
510 S.E.2d 810 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1999)
Sinclair v. Daly
672 S.E.2d 672 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2009)
Pilcher v. Stribling
647 S.E.2d 8 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Rashida Strober v. Thomas Harris, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rashida-strober-v-thomas-harris-gactapp-2020.