Dahl Cohran & Associates, Inc. v. B & S Properties

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ April 30, 2025

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order: A25A1560. DAHL COHRAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. v. B & S PROPERTIES.

B & S Properties filed a garnishment claim against Dahl Cohran & Associates, Inc.1 After Dahl Cohran failed to answer, B & S Properties moved for entry of a default judgment. Dahl Cohran thereafter answered and B & S Properties filed a traverse to the answer. The trial court granted the traverse and request for default judgment and entered default judgment in favor of B & S Properties. Dahl Cohran filed this direct appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction.

Appeals in cases involving garnishment must be initiated by an application for discretionary appeal, subject to exceptions not applicable here. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (4), (b); Maloy v. Ewing, 226 Ga. App. 490, 491 (486 SE2d 708) (1997). See also Prison Health Svcs. v. Ga. Dept. of Admin. Svcs., 265 Ga. 810, 811 (1) (462 SE2d 601) (1995) (an order is subject to the discretionary appeal procedure “if the underlying subject matter of the appeal is one contained in OCGA § 5-6-35”).

1 The company’s name is also spelled “Dahl Cochran” in some of the record materials.

“Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Hair Restoration Specialists v. State of Ga., 360 Ga. App. 901, 903 (862 SE2d 564) (2021) (citation and punctuation omitted). Because Dahl Cohran failed to follow the required procedure, we lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 04/30/2025 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.