Mikell v. Hortenstine

2 Citing cases

  1. Schaffer v. Collinsville Meadow Townhomes, LLC

    897 S.E.2d 635 (Ga. Ct. App. 2024)

    Quarterman v. Lee, 291 Ga. App. 603, 603, 662 S.E.2d 234 (2008) (punctuation omitted). But given that the mischaracterization of the consideration in the deeds is contained in the trial court’s order, review of the transcript is unnecessary, See Mikellv.Hortenstine, 334 Ga. App. 621, 622–23 n. 3, 780 S.E.2d 53 (2015) (explaining transcript was not necessary to resolution of the appeal as the alleged error was apparent from the face of the order); Cameron v. Miles, 311 Ga. App. 753, 755 (1), 716 S.E.2d 831 (2011) (same).

  2. Speedy Care Transp. v. George

    348 Ga. App. 325 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018)   Cited 5 times

    Nor can the alleged error be established from the face of the order. Compare, e.g., Mikell v. Hortenstine , 334 Ga. App. 621, 622–623 n. 3, 780 S.E.2d 53 (2015) (transcript was not necessary to resolution of the appeal as the alleged error was apparent from the face of the order). Appellants point out that Ms. Roscoe has no obligation to contribute to the support of Mr. Roscoe's and George's children.