Opinion
A23A0376
10-11-2022
GIRISH MODI v. GREATER ATLANTA TELEGU ASSOCIATION.
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
On July 6, 2022, following a bench trial, the trial court granted final judgment in favor of defendant Greater Atlanta Telegu Association in this civil action. On July 11, plaintiff Girish Modi filed a notice of appeal. On August 5, Modi filed a motion to vacate the final judgment or for a new trial. Although that motion remains pending below, the trial court clerk transmitted the record to this Court at Modi's insistence and the appeal has been docketed here. We, however, lack jurisdiction.
Although the filing of a notice of appeal generally divests the trial court of jurisdiction, "such divestiture does not become effective during the period in which a motion for new trial may be filed. In the event a motion for new trial is timely filed as provided in OCGA § 5-5-40 . . ., the effectiveness of the divestiture of jurisdiction is then delayed until the motion for new trial is ruled upon and a notice of appeal to the ruling has been filed or the period for appealing the ruling has expired." Housing Auth. of City of Atlanta v. Geeter, 252 Ga. 196, 197 (312 S.E.2d 309) (1984). Thus, the trial court retains jurisdiction to rule on Modi's pending motion for new trial.
Under these circumstances, Modi was required to comply with the interlocutory appeal procedures of OCGA § 5-6-34 (b), including obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the trial court, to appeal the judgment. See Home Ins. Co. v. Fort Valley Mills, 132 Ga.App. 15, 16 (207 S.E.2d 590) (1974); accord Auld v. Weaver, 196 Ga.App. 782, 782-783 (397 S.E.2d 51) (1990). Modi's failure to comply with the interlocutory appeal procedures deprives us of jurisdiction over this premature direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Home Ins. Co., 132 Ga.App. at 16. If the trial court denies Modi's motion for new trial, he may file another notice of appeal within 30 days of that ruling.