Charles Alexander Peterson v. Cleveland Calhoun Peterson

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ January 25, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19I0149. CHARLES ALEXANDER PETERSON et al. v. CLEVELAND CALHOUN PETERSON et al.

Charles Alexander Peterson and Hugh David Peterson (“the applicants”) seek to appeal a superior court order that, among other things, granted summary judgment to the opposing parties on some of the applicants’ claims. Under OCGA § 9-11-56 (h), the grant of summary judgment on any issue or as to any party is reviewable by direct appeal. See City of Demorest v. Town of Mt. Airy, 282 Ga. 653, 654 n.1 (653 SE2d 43) (2007); Whiddon v. Stargell, 192 Ga. App. 826, 827-828 (386 SE2d 884) (1989). Accordingly, the order in this case is subject to direct appeal. Moreover, all rulings within that order, as well as any prior non-final rulings that were not themselves directly appealable, may also be raised as part of such a direct appeal. See Headrick v. Stonepark of Dunwoody Unit Owners Assn., 331 Ga. App. 772, 774-775 (1) (a) (771 SE2d 382) (2015); Southeast Ceramics v. Klem, 246 Ga. 294, 295 (1) (271 SE2d 199) (1980); see also OCGA § 5-6-34 (d). “This Court will grant a timely application for interlocutory review if the order complained of is subject to direct appeal and the applicants have not otherwise filed a notice of appeal.” Spivey v. Hembree, 268 Ga. App. 485, 486 n.1 (602 SE2d 246) (2004). Here, however, the applicants contend that they have already filed a timely

notice of appeal in the superior court. Under these circumstances, this application is hereby DISMISSED as superfluous.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 01/25/2019 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.