Widener v. Ravenscroft
This text of 289 S.E.2d 257 (Widener v. Ravenscroft) 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.
Opinion
Ravenscroft, an employee of Widener, d/b/a Southland Erection Company, was injured on the job. Ravenscroft sued Wright, the general contractor. Wright filed a third-party complaint against Widener, the subcontractor, on the basis of an indemnification agreement between Wright and Widener. Ravenscroft dismissed his complaint against Wright with prejudice. The trial court’s order dismissing the original complaint states: “Nothing in this order shall be construed to affect the third party complaint in this action.” Widener appeals contending that the dismissal of the original claim is a final, appealable order as to the third-party action. We do not agree.
While this case presents challenging and interesting issues on its [13]*13merits, we cannot reach such issues. The order dismissing the defendant in the main action was not a final judgment within the purview of Section 54 (b) of the Civil Practice Act (Code Ann. § 81A-154 (b)). The case remains pending in the trial court. No certificate of immediate review was granted by the trial court. Thus, the appeal is premature and must be dismissed. Code Ann. § 6-701 (a) (1); Von Waldner v. Baldwin/Cheshire, Inc., 133 Ga. App. 23 (209 SE2d 715) (1974); McReynolds v. Savannah News-Press Division, 133 Ga. App. 815 (212 SE2d 470) (1975).
Appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
289 S.E.2d 257, 161 Ga. App. 12, 1982 Ga. App. LEXIS 1742, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/widener-v-ravenscroft-gactapp-1982.