Opinion
A23A1112
03-21-2023
ANDREW LUTZ et al. v. GREENSKY, LLC et al.
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
GreenSky, LLC and related entities ("GreenSky") filed this action for breach of contract and injunctive relief against former employees Andrew Lutz and Travis Cohen. On October 4, 2022, the trial court granted GreenSky's motion for preliminary injunction and enjoined the defendants from performing any of the same duties that they had performed for GreenSky for any competing business; soliciting any GreenSky employees, merchants, sponsors, clients, or customers; and using, utilizing, reverse engineering, or disclosing any confidential information of GreenSky. The injunction was to remain in effect until December 31, 2022, unless otherwise extended by the trial court. The defendants appealed the October 4 order pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (4), and that appeal is currently pending before this Court. See Case No. A23A0674 (docketed Nov. 23, 2022). Thereafter, GreenSky filed a motion to extend the preliminary injunction, and on January 9, 2023, the trial court entered an order extending the preliminary injunction until July 31, 2023, subject to any earlier trial on the merits. The defendants then filed this direct appeal from the January 9 order. We, however, lack jurisdiction.
Pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (4), "[a]ll judgments or orders granting or refusing applications for receivers or for interlocutory or final injunctions" are subject to direct appeal. However, unlike orders granting or refusing injunctions, "orders modifying or dissolving interlocutory injunctions are appealable only on an interlocutory basis pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-34 (b)." Jones v. Peach Trader Inc., 302 Ga. 504, 511 (III) (807 S.E.2d 840) (2017). Here, the January 9 order modified the previous injunction by extending its duration. As such, the defendants were required to follow the interlocutory appeal procedure, and their failure to do so deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.