Opinion
A24A0434
11-17-2023
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
Michael Lalonde sued his former attorneys, Taylor English Duma, LLP, and one of its partners, Michael H. Trotter, for legal malpractice. The trial court granted summary judgment to the law firm and Trotter, and Lalonde appealed to this Court. We affirmed the grant of summary judgment in Lalonde v. Taylor English Duma, LLP, 349 Ga.App. 853 (825 S.E.2d 237) (2019) (physical precedent only), and in doing so, determined that the cross appeal was moot. Id. at 863 (4). The Supreme Court initially granted Lalonde's application for writ of certiorari, see Lalonde v. Taylor English Duma, LLP, Case No. S19C1110 (Nov. 18, 2019), but later determined the writ was improvidently granted and denied it. See Lalonde v. Taylor English Duma, LLP, Case No. S19G1110 (Apr. 6, 2020).
Upon remittitur, Lalonde filed a motion for a pretrial conference, arguing that the trial court granted summary judgment only on one of his claims and that his lost market value and attorney fees claims remained to be adjudicated. The trial court denied Lalonde's motion, finding that all of his claims were fully resolved adversely to him by this Court. From that order, Lalonde filed this direct appeal.
Pretermitting whether the trial court's order was final under OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1), the court correctly determined that this Court previously adjudicated all of Lalonde's claims. And Lalonde may not relitigate issues already decided by this Court. See Massey v. Massey, 294 Ga. 163, 165 (2) (751 S.E.2d 330) (2013) ("'[A] party is not entitled to a second appeal from a single order.'[Cit.]"). "It is axiomatic that the same issue cannot be relitigated ad infinitum. The same is true of appeals of the same issue on the same grounds. Our determination in the earlier appeal is res judicata; the instant appeal is therefore barred, and we are without jurisdiction to review this same matter for a second time." Echols v. State, 243 Ga.App. 775, 775 (534 S.E.2d 464) (2000) (citation omitted).
Accordingly, Lalonde presents no issue for review, and this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.