From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Culwell v. Lomas Nettleton Company

Supreme Court of Georgia
Sep 27, 1978
242 Ga. 242 (Ga. 1978)

Summary

equating appealability and expiration of appeal period with preclusive effect

Summary of this case from Cmty. State Bank v. Strong

Opinion

33741.

ARGUED SEPTEMBER 11, 1978.

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 27, 1978.

Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Georgia — 145 Ga. App. 519 ( 244 S.E.2d 61) (1978).

William R. Parker, for appellant.

Nall Miller, Robert B. Hocutt, Troutman, Sanders, Lockerman Ashmore, John J. Dalton, Freeman Hawkins, William Q. Bird, for appellees.


This court granted the application for writ of certiorari to review the decision and judgment of the Court of Appeals in Culwell v. Lomas Nettleton Co., 145 Ga. App. 519 ( 244 S.E.2d 61) (1978) involving the dismissal of appeals filed against American Bankers Life Assurance Company of Florida and United American Life Insurance Company.

The Court of Appeals held that in a suit against multiple defendants, when one party obtains summary judgment against another party, the losing party must appeal within 30 days from that ruling under Code Ann. § 81A-156 (h) or lose his right to appellate review of the grant of summary judgment. This decision has the collateral effect of making the grant of summary judgment res judicata of the issue. We disagree and reverse.

The entry of a judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties is not a final judgment under Code Ann. § 6-701 (a) 1 and lacks res judicata effect unless the trial court makes an express direction for the entry of the final judgment and a determination that no just reason for delaying the finality of the judgment exists. Code Ann. § 81A-154 (b); Walker v. Robinson, 232 Ga. 361 ( 207 S.E.2d 6) (1974); 10 Wright Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil, p. 90, § 2661 (1973). If the trial court does certify that the judgment is final and ripe for review under Code Ann. § 81A-154 (b), the time for appeal begins to run. No certification was made in this case.

But Code Ann. § 81A-156 (h) also gives a losing party the right to a direct appeal from an order granting summary judgment on any issue or as to any party even though the judgment is not final under Code Ann. §§ 6-701 (a) 1 or 81A-154 (b). The Court of Appeals decision makes this direct appeal from a grant of summary judgment mandatory or the right of appellate review is lost, and the summary judgment is res judicata of the issue. However, Code Ann. § 81A-156 (h) is an exception to the finality rule which is for the benefit of the losing party. The party against whom summary judgment was granted may appeal either after the grant of summary judgment or after the rendition of the final judgment. Therefore, when the losing party appeals after the rendition of the final judgment, the grant of summary judgment is still subject to appellate review. Thomas v. Allstate Ins. Co., 133 Ga. App. 193 (1a) ( 210 S.E.2d 361) (1974) is overruled.

The Court of Appeals erred in dismissing the appeals filed by appellant Culwell against American Bankers Life Assurance Company of Florida and United American Life Insurance Company.

Judgment reversed. All the Justices concur.


ARGUED SEPTEMBER 11, 1978 — DECIDED SEPTEMBER 27, 1978.


I concur in the opinion and judgment of the court insofar as it applies to a motion for summary judgment granted to one or more but less than all defendants. Although the rule may be equally applicable where summary judgment is granted to one or more but less than all plaintiffs, we do not have that issue before us.


Summaries of

Culwell v. Lomas Nettleton Company

Supreme Court of Georgia
Sep 27, 1978
242 Ga. 242 (Ga. 1978)

equating appealability and expiration of appeal period with preclusive effect

Summary of this case from Cmty. State Bank v. Strong

stating that the entry of a judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims and parties is neither an appealable final judgment nor a judgment entitled to res judicata effect unless the trial court makes an express direction for the entry of the final judgment and a determination that no just reason for delaying the finality of the judgment exists

Summary of this case from Lops v. Lops

In Culwell v. Lomas Nettleton Co., 242 Ga. 242 (248 S.E.2d 641) (1978), we made it clear that a party could appeal the grant of summary judgment under OCGA § 9-11-56 (h) when it was entered or wait until the entry of the final judgment.

Summary of this case from Stewart v. Milliken

In Culwell, we held that OCGA § 9-11-56 (h) is an exception to the finality rule which does not require the losing party to file an immediate direct appeal after a grant of partial summary judgment.

Summary of this case from Mitchell v. Oliver

In Culwell v. Lomas Nettleton Co., 242 Ga. 242 (248 S.E.2d 641), the Supreme Court held that in a multiple party or a multiple complaint suit, the party against whom summary judgment was granted may file a timely appeal after the grant or wait until after rendition of the final judgment.

Summary of this case from Mixon v. Terminal Transport c. Union
Case details for

Culwell v. Lomas Nettleton Company

Case Details

Full title:CULWELL v. LOMAS NETTLETON COMPANY et al

Court:Supreme Court of Georgia

Date published: Sep 27, 1978

Citations

242 Ga. 242 (Ga. 1978)
248 S.E.2d 641

Citing Cases

Mitchell v. Oliver

Bozard v. J. A. Jones Constr. Co., 146 Ga. App. 877 ( 247 S.E.2d 605) (1978). This court granted a writ of…

Lops v. Lops

Nonetheless, we recognize that under Georgia law finality for preclusion purposes may also be measured by the…