Opinion
A24A0078
08-18-2023
CHRISTINE WILKINSON et al. v. PEACHTREE POINT, LLC.
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
The appellee filed this dispossessory action in state court. When the appellants failed to file a timely answer, the state court awarded the appellee a writ of possession on May 23, 2023. On June 26, 2023, the appellants filed a motion for new trial or judgment notwithstanding the verdict, a plea in abatement, and a motion to recall writ of possession. On July 11, 2023, the trial court issued an order denying these filings and ruling that the writ of possession remained in effect. On July 16, 2023, the appellants filed the instant direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction.
A valid and timely motion for new trial or motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict tolls the time for filing of notice of appeal until the trial court's entry of an order finally disposing of the motion. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a); American Flat Glass Distribs. v. Michael, 260 Ga. 312, 312 (392 S.E.2d 855) (1990); Jones v. Robertson, 191 Ga.App. 537, 537-538 (382 S.E.2d 382) (1989). Even if the appellants' June 2023 filings could properly be construed as tolling motions, they were untimely because they were filed 34 days after entry of the writ of possession, and therefore they did not toll the time for filing the notice of appeal. See OCGA §§ 5-5-40 (a) &9-11-50 (b); Jarrard v. Copeland, 205 Ga.App. 20, 20-21 (421 S.E.2d 84) (1992); Lewis v. Sun Mgmt., 182 Ga.App. 560, 560 (356 S.E.2d 526) (1987). Accordingly, this appeal is untimely because it was filed 54 days after entry of the writ of possession. See OCGA § 44-7-56; Ray M. Wright, Inc. v. Jones, 239 Ga.App. 521, 522-523 (521 S.E.2d 456) (1999). In addition, the denial of the June 2023 filings was not directly appealable in its own right. See Jim Ellis Atlanta, Inc. v. Adamson, 283 Ga.App. 116, 116-117 (640 S.E.2d 688) (2006); Jones, 191 Ga.App. at 538; Lewis, 182 Ga.App. at 560.
For the foregoing reasons, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.