Steven Ronald Schiffman v. U.S. Bank National Association-Trustee for Rmac Pass-Through Trust Series 2016-H

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Steven Ronald Schiffman v. U.S. Bank National Association-Trustee for Rmac Pass-Through Trust Series 2016-H

DecidedDecember 8, 2025

DocketA26A0806

StatusPublished

This text of Steven Ronald Schiffman v. U.S. Bank National Association-Trustee for Rmac Pass-Through Trust Series 2016-H (Steven Ronald Schiffman v. U.S. Bank National Association-Trustee for Rmac Pass-Through Trust Series 2016-H) 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

Steven Ronald Schiffman v. U.S. Bank National Association-Trustee for Rmac Pass-Through Trust Series 2016-H, (Ga. Ct. App. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ December 08, 2025

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A26A0806. STEVEN RONALD SCHIFFMAN v. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION-TRUSTEE FOR RMAC PASS-THROUGH TRUST SERIES 2016-H

Steven Ronald Schiffman sued U.S. Bank National Association-Trustee for RMAC Pass-Through Trust Series 2016-H (“the Bank”) for wrongful foreclosure. On November 21, 2024, the trial court entered an order denying Schiffman’s motion for default judgment and granting the Bank’s motion to quash service. Schiffman then filed this direct appeal from the trial court’s order. We lack jurisdiction. Under OCGA § 5-6-34(a)(1), direct appeals generally may be taken from “[a]ll final judgments, that is to say, where the case is no longer pending in the court below[.]” See also 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, no final judgment has been entered and the case remains pending below. To obtain immediate review of the trial court’s order, therefore, Schiffman was required to follow the interlocutory appeal procedures set forth in OCGA § 5-6-34(b), which include obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the trial court. See Islamkhan v. Khan, 299 Ga. 548, 551 (2) (787 SE2d 731) (2016). Schiffman’s failure to follow the interlocutory appeal procedures deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal. In re Bruni, 369 Ga. App. 488, 493 (8) (893 SE2d 862) (2023) (“The jurisdiction of an appellate court to consider an appeal depends upon whether the appeal is taken in substantial compliance with the rules of appellate procedure prescribing the conditions under which the judgment of the trial court may be considered appealable.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 12/08/2025 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 08, 2025

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A26A0806. STEVEN RONALD SCHIFFMAN v. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION-TRUSTEE FOR RMAC PASS-THROUGH TRUST SERIES 2016-H

Steven Ronald Schiffman sued U.S. Bank National Association-Trustee for RMAC Pass-Through Trust Series 2016-H (“the Bank”) for wrongful foreclosure. On November 21, 2024, the trial court entered an order denying Schiffman’s motion for default judgment and granting the Bank’s motion to quash service. Schiffman then filed this direct appeal from the trial court’s order. We lack jurisdiction. Under OCGA § 5-6-34(a)(1), direct appeals generally may be taken from “[a]ll final judgments, that is to say, where the case is no longer pending in the court below[.]” See also 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, no final judgment has been entered and the case remains pending below. To obtain immediate review of the trial court’s order, therefore, Schiffman was required to follow the interlocutory appeal procedures set forth in OCGA § 5-6-34(b), which include obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the trial court. See Islamkhan v. Khan, 299 Ga. 548, 551 (2) (787 SE2d 731) (2016). Schiffman’s failure to follow the interlocutory appeal procedures deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal. In re Bruni, 369 Ga. App. 488, 493 (8) (893 SE2d 862) (2023) (“The jurisdiction of an appellate court to consider an appeal depends upon whether the appeal is taken in substantial compliance with the rules of appellate procedure prescribing the conditions under which the judgment of the trial court may be considered appealable.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 12/08/2025 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)

Steven Ronald Schiffman v. U.S. Bank National Association-Trustee for Rmac Pass-Through Trust Series 2016-H, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steven-ronald-schiffman-v-us-bank-national-association-trustee-for-rmac-gactapp-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack