Ricky Smith v. Auto Owner's Insurance Company

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Ricky Smith v. Auto Owner's Insurance Company

DecidedDecember 24, 2019

DocketA20A0689

StatusPublished

This text of Ricky Smith v. Auto Owner's Insurance Company (Ricky Smith v. Auto Owner's Insurance Company) 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

Ricky Smith v. Auto Owner's Insurance Company, (Ga. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ December 04, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A20A0689. RICKY SMITH v. AUTO OWNER’S INSURANCE COMPANY.

Auto Owner’s Insurance Company sued Ricky Smith. The trial court granted summary judgment to Auto Owner’s, awarding $2,239.36, plus accrued interest in the amount $355.60, plus costs. Smith filed this direct appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction. “Although the grant of a motion for summary judgment is in general directly appealable, where the amount of the judgment is [$10,000] or less, an application for discretionary appeal is required.” Lightwerk Studios v. Door Units of Ga., 184 Ga. App. 148, 149 (361 SE2d 32) (1987); see OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (6). As the total judgment in favor of Auto Owner’s is for less than $10,000, the entry of summary judgment provides no basis for a direct appeal in this case. See Ca-Shar, Inc. v. McKesson Corp., 204 Ga. App. 865, 865-866 (420 SE2d 810) (1992). Because Smith was required to file a discretionary application, we lack jurisdiction to consider this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Hill v. Rose Electric Co., 220 Ga. App. 603, 604 (469 SE2d 844) (1996).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 12/04/2019 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

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ December 04, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A20A0689. RICKY SMITH v. AUTO OWNER’S INSURANCE COMPANY.

Auto Owner’s Insurance Company sued Ricky Smith. The trial court granted summary judgment to Auto Owner’s, awarding $2,239.36, plus accrued interest in the amount $355.60, plus costs. Smith filed this direct appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction. “Although the grant of a motion for summary judgment is in general directly appealable, where the amount of the judgment is [$10,000] or less, an application for discretionary appeal is required.” Lightwerk Studios v. Door Units of Ga., 184 Ga. App. 148, 149 (361 SE2d 32) (1987); see OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (6). As the total judgment in favor of Auto Owner’s is for less than $10,000, the entry of summary judgment provides no basis for a direct appeal in this case. See Ca-Shar, Inc. v. McKesson Corp., 204 Ga. App. 865, 865-866 (420 SE2d 810) (1992). Because Smith was required to file a discretionary application, we lack jurisdiction to consider this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Hill v. Rose Electric Co., 220 Ga. App. 603, 604 (469 SE2d 844) (1996).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 12/04/2019 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Ricky Smith v. Auto Owner's Insurance Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ricky-smith-v-auto-owners-insurance-company-gactapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack