Ronald Fuller v. Jay Delaino

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 9, 2026
DocketA26A1246
StatusPublished

This text of Ronald Fuller v. Jay Delaino (Ronald Fuller v. Jay Delaino) 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
Ronald Fuller v. Jay Delaino, (Ga. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia ATLANTA,____________________ February 09, 2026 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order: A26A1246. RONALD FULLER v. JAY DELAINO. Following a vehicle collision, Ronald Fuller filed an action against Jay Delaino. Fuller served Progressive Premier Insurance Company of Illinois as his uninsured motorist coverage carrier. Progressive filed an answer and cross-claim against Delaino. Progressive ultimately notified the parties and the court of its withdrawal of its answer and cross-claim. Fuller filed an “Objection and Motion to Quash [Progressive’s] Withdrawal of its Answer and Cross-Claim.” The trial court denied Fuller’s objection and motion. Upon Fuller’s request, the trial court certified its decision for immediate review. Fuller then filed this direct appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction. As a general rule, a right of direct appeal lies from only a final judgment — that is, where the case is no longer pending below. See OCGA § 5-6-34(a)(1); Yanes v. Escobar, 362 Ga. App. 896, 897 (870 SE2d 506) (2022) (“an order is final and appealable when it leaves no issues remaining to be resolved, constitutes the court’s final ruling on the merits of the action, and leaves the parties with no further recourse in the trial court”) (punctuation omitted). Here, the denial of Fuller’s objection and motion was not a final judgment and the case remains pending below. Thus, to obtain immediate review of the trial court’s order, therefore, Fuller was required to follow the interlocutory appeal procedures set forth in OCGA § 5-6-34(b). See Islamkhan v. Khan, 299 Ga. 548, 551(2) (787 SE2d 731) (2016). Although Fuller obtained a certificate of immediate review, he failed to file an application for interlocutory appeal. Given Fuller’s failure, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/09/2026 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

Islamkhan v. Khan
787 S.E.2d 731 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ronald Fuller v. Jay Delaino, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ronald-fuller-v-jay-delaino-gactapp-2026.