Stephen Meneses v. Riverside Military Academy, Inc., D/B/A Riverside Preparatory Academy

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Stephen Meneses v. Riverside Military Academy, Inc., D/B/A Riverside Preparatory Academy

DecidedMarch 23, 2026

DocketA26I0171

StatusPublished

This text of Stephen Meneses v. Riverside Military Academy, Inc., D/B/A Riverside Preparatory Academy (Stephen Meneses v. Riverside Military Academy, Inc., D/B/A Riverside Preparatory Academy) 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

Stephen Meneses v. Riverside Military Academy, Inc., D/B/A Riverside Preparatory Academy, (Ga. Ct. App. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ March 23, 2026

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A26I0171. STEPHEN MENESES et al v. RIVERSIDE MILITARY ACADEMY, INC., d/b/a RIVERSIDE PREPARATORY ACADEMY et al.

The plaintiffs Stephen Meneses and Kelly Clark, individually and as next of friend of minor child, S. A. M., II, filed a complaint against Riverside Military Academy, Inc. d/b/a Riverside Preparatory Academy, Noel Perez, Adrian Moorman, Bryan Zhong, and Yann Kariningufu for injuries sustained by the minor child during an alleged hazing incident at the residential military academy. Riverside and Perez moved for summary judgment as to the claims against them, and the trial court granted the motion. The plaintiffs seek an interlocutory appeal of this ruling. Under OCGA § 9-11-56(h), the grant of summary judgment on any issue or as to any party is reviewable by direct appeal. See City of Demorest v. Town of Mt. Airy, 282 Ga. 653, 654 n.1 (653 SE2d 43) (2007); Whiddon v. Stargell, 192 Ga. App. 826, 827–28 (386 SE2d 884) (1989). This Court will grant a timely application for interlocutory appeal if the order at issue is directly appealable and the applicant has not already filed a timely notice of appeal. See Spivey v. Hembree, 268 Ga. App. 485, 486 n.1 (602 SE2d 246) (2004). Accordingly, this interlocutory application is hereby GRANTED. The plaintiffs shall have ten days from the date of this order to file a notice of appeal in the trial court. If the plaintiffs have already filed a timely notice of appeal from the order at issue here, they need not file a second notice. The clerk of the trial court is DIRECTED to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 03/23/2026 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

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ March 23, 2026

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A26I0171. STEPHEN MENESES et al v. RIVERSIDE MILITARY ACADEMY, INC., d/b/a RIVERSIDE PREPARATORY ACADEMY et al.

The plaintiffs Stephen Meneses and Kelly Clark, individually and as next of friend of minor child, S. A. M., II, filed a complaint against Riverside Military Academy, Inc. d/b/a Riverside Preparatory Academy, Noel Perez, Adrian Moorman, Bryan Zhong, and Yann Kariningufu for injuries sustained by the minor child during an alleged hazing incident at the residential military academy. Riverside and Perez moved for summary judgment as to the claims against them, and the trial court granted the motion. The plaintiffs seek an interlocutory appeal of this ruling. Under OCGA § 9-11-56(h), the grant of summary judgment on any issue or as to any party is reviewable by direct appeal. See City of Demorest v. Town of Mt. Airy, 282 Ga. 653, 654 n.1 (653 SE2d 43) (2007); Whiddon v. Stargell, 192 Ga. App. 826, 827–28 (386 SE2d 884) (1989). This Court will grant a timely application for interlocutory appeal if the order at issue is directly appealable and the applicant has not already filed a timely notice of appeal. See Spivey v. Hembree, 268 Ga. App. 485, 486 n.1 (602 SE2d 246) (2004). Accordingly, this interlocutory application is hereby GRANTED. The plaintiffs shall have ten days from the date of this order to file a notice of appeal in the trial court. If the plaintiffs have already filed a timely notice of appeal from the order at issue here, they need not file a second notice. The clerk of the trial court is DIRECTED to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 03/23/2026 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Stephen Meneses v. Riverside Military Academy, Inc., D/B/A Riverside Preparatory Academy, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stephen-meneses-v-riverside-military-academy-inc-dba-riverside-gactapp-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack