Pirkle v. Bell

6 Citing cases

  1. Callaway v. Garner

    340 Ga. App. 176 (Ga. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 9 times
    Holding that trial court made sufficient findings of fact to demonstrate that it considered the relevant statutory factors

    We note that Georgia courts have repeatedly affirmed dismissal orders that were issued due to the appellant’s designation in the notice of appeal that a nonexistent transcript would be included in the appellate record. See, e.g., HTTP Hypothermia Therapy, 330 Ga. App. at 861 (1) (affirming the trial court’s dismissal of an appeal when the appellant’s inadvertent reference to a nonexistent transcript in its notice of appeal resulted in a 15-month delay between when the notice of appeal was filed and when the case was dismissed and holding that the delay was unreasonable, inexcusable, and caused by the appellant); Pirkle v. Bell, 270 Ga. 438, 438 (510 SE2d 814) (1999) (affirming the trial court’s dismissal of an appeal when three-month delay was caused by appellant’s designation in the notice of appeal that a nonexistent transcript would be included in the record and on appellant’s failure to check on the status of the appeal); Lindstrom v. Forsyth Cty., 221 Ga. App. 581, 582 (472 SE2d 106) (1996) *182(affirming dismissal of an appeal when two-month delay was caused by a mistaken designation in the notice of appeal that a nonexistent transcript would be included in the record and appellant made no efforts to expedite the appeal); Devins v. Leafmore Forest Condo. Ass’n of Owners, 213 Ga. App. 823, 823 (446 SE2d 531) (1994) (affirming the trial court’s dismissal of an appeal when appellant caused a delay in the docketing of the appeal by mistakenly designating a nonexistent transcript as part of the record and by failing to take any steps to expedite the appeal); Johnston v. Ga. Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 209 Ga. App. 224, 225 (433 SE2d

  2. HTTP Hypothermia Therapy v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.

    A14A2219 (Ga. Ct. App. Feb. 12, 2015)

    Pistacchio, 314 Ga. App. at 121-22 (punctuation omitted); see Am. Nat. Prop. & Cas. Co., 243 Ga. App. at 646-47 (finding that a month and a half delay in filing a transcript was unreasonable and prevented docketing of the appeal on the earliest possible calendar); see also Court of Appeals Rule 12 ("The dockets for the January, April, and September terms shall close at midnight on the 15th day of December, April and August, respectively."). See Pirkle v. Bell, 270 Ga. 438, 438 (510 SE2d 814) (1999) (affirming the trial court's dismissal of an appeal when three-month delay was caused by appellant's designation in the notice of appeal that a non-existent transcript would be included in the record and on appellant's failure to check on the status of the appeal); Pistacchio, 314 Ga. App. at 121-22 (affirming the trial court's dismissal of an appeal when the transcript was filed over three months after the notice of appeal and the delay prevented an appellate decision at the earliest possible date); Am. Nat. Prop. & Cas. Co., 243 Ga. App. at 646-47 (finding that a month-and-a-half delay in filing a transcript was unreasonable and prevented docketing of the appeal on the earliest possible calendar); Hameed v. Hall, 234 Ga. App. 890, 892 (1) (508 SE2d 680) (1998) (finding that a 72-day delay in filing a transcript identified in the notice of appeal was unreasonable and inexcusable regardless of whether that transcript was necessary); Lindstrom v. Forsyth County, 2

  3. Boyd v. Johngalt Holdings, LLC

    290 Ga. 658 (Ga. 2012)   Cited 2 times
    In Boyd v. JohnGalt Holdings, 290 Ga. 658, 724 S.E.2d 395 (2012), we transferred the appeal from the dismissals to the Court of Appeals, and in Boyd v. JohnGalt Holdings, 318 Ga.App. 866, 736 S.E.2d 459 (2012), the Court of Appeals reversed the dismissals and remanded for a hearing on the question of indigence.

    In that time, this Court construed the constitutional provision governing its appellate jurisdiction over equity cases in Beauchamp v. Knight, supra, 261 Ga. 608, 409 S.E.2d 208, and has routinely retained jurisdiction of an appeal from the trial court's dismissal of an appeal in a title-to-land case. See, e.g., Mitchell v. 3280 Peachtree 1, 285 Ga. 576, 678 S.E.2d 880 (2009); Kelly v. Dawson County, 282 Ga. 189, 646 S.E.2d 53 (2007); and Pirkle v. Bell, 270 Ga. 438, 510 S.E.2d 814 (1999). The trial court's dismissal of an appeal does not affect this Court's appellate jurisdiction; it only affects the order in which the appellate court addresses the enumerated errors.

  4. SDM Invs. Grp. v. HBN Media, Inc.

    358 Ga. App. 421 (Ga. Ct. App. 2021)   Cited 4 times
    Holding that trial court abused its discretion in denying motion to dismiss under OCGA § 5-6-48 (c) when appellant waited seven months after filing first notice of appeal to inform court that transcript was not necessary for appeal

    g from the delay of more than a year, and delay discernibly delayed docketing of the record in the appellate court and prevented an appellate decision on the merits at the earliest possible date); Coptic Constr. Co., Inc. , 279 Ga. App. at 456-57, 631 S.E.2d 475 (reversing trial court's order denying homeowner's motion to dismiss contractor's appeal given latter's inexcusable delay of more than nine months in filing the transcript, which delayed just disposition of case); Am. Nat. Prop. & Cas. Co. , 243 Ga. App. at 646–47, 534 S.E.2d 123 (finding that a month-and-a-half delay in filing a transcript was unreasonable and prevented docketing of the appeal on the earliest possible calendar); Lemmons v. Newton , 269 Ga. App. 880, 882, 605 S.E.2d 626 (2004) (affirming dismissal of appeal where the appellant did not seek an extension of time for filing the transcript or make inquiries to the court reporter concerning the transcript until after the filing of the appellees’ motion to dismiss); Pirkle v. Bell , 270 Ga. 438, 438, 510 S.E.2d 814 (1999) (affirming the trial court's dismissal of an appeal when three-month delay was caused by appellant's designation in the notice of appeal that a non-existent transcript would be included in the record and on appellant's failure to check on the status of the appeal); Hameed v. Hall , 234 Ga. App. 890, 892 (1), 508 S.E.2d 680 (1998) (holding that a 72-day delay in filing a transcript identified in the notice of appeal was unreasonable and inexcusable regardless of whether that transcript was necessary ); Jackson , 217 Ga. App. at 503-04 (2), 458 S.E.2d 377 (holding that the trial court abused its discretion in denying appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal when, although the appellant sought and was granted numerous extension, they did not follow up with the court reporter to determine the transcript preparation status for a five-month period). A20A1775

  5. Therapy v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.

    768 S.E.2d 542 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015)

    Pistacchio, 314 Ga.App. at 121–22, 723 S.E.2d 322 (punctuation omitted); see Am. Nat. Prop. & Cas. Co., 243 Ga.App. at 646–47, 534 S.E.2d 123 (finding that a month and a half delay in filing a transcript was unreasonable and prevented docketing of the appeal on the earliest possible calendar); see also Court of Appeals Rule 12 (“The dockets for the January, April, and September terms shall close at midnight on the 15th day of December, April and August, respectively.”).See Pirkle v. Bell, 270 Ga. 438, 438, 510 S.E.2d 814 (1999) (affirming the trial court's dismissal of an appeal when three-month delay was caused by appellant's designation in the notice of appeal that a non-existent transcript would be included in the record and on appellant's failure to check on the status of the appeal); Pistacchio, 314 Ga.App. at 121–22, 723 S.E.2d 322 (affirming the trial court's dismissal of an appeal when the transcript was filed over three months after the notice of appeal and the delay prevented an appellate decision at the earliest possible date); Am. Nat. Prop. & Cas. Co., 243 Ga.App. at 646–47, 534 S.E.2d 123 (finding that a month-and-a-half delay in filing a transcript was unreasonable and prevented docketing of the appeal on the earliest possible calendar); Hameed v. Hall, 234 Ga.App. 890, 892(1), 508 S.E.2d 680 (1998) (finding that a 72–day delay in filing a transcript identified in the notice of appeal was unreasonable and inexcusable regardless of whether that transcript was necessary); Lindstrom v. Forsyth Co

  6. HTTP Hypothermia Therapy v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.

    768 S.E.2d 542 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015)

    Pistacchio, 314 Ga.App. at 121–22, 723 S.E.2d 322 (punctuation omitted); see Am. Nat. Prop. & Cas. Co., 243 Ga.App. at 646–47, 534 S.E.2d 123 (finding that a month-and-a-half delay in filing a transcript was unreasonable and prevented docketing of the appeal on the earliest possible calendar); see also Court of Appeals Rule 12 (“The dockets for the January, April, and September terms shall close at midnight on the 15th day of December, April and August, respectively.”).See Pirkle v. Bell, 270 Ga. 438, 438, 510 S.E.2d 814 (1999) (affirming the trial court's dismissal of an appeal when three-month delay was caused by appellant's designation in the notice of appeal that a non-existent transcript would be included in the record and on appellant's failure to check on the status of the appeal); Pistacchio, 314 Ga.App. at 121–22, 723 S.E.2d 322 (affirming the trial court's dismissal of an appeal when the transcript was filed over three months after the notice of appeal and the delay prevented an appellate decision at the earliest possible date); Am. Nat. Prop. & Cas. Co., 243 Ga.App. at 646–47, 534 S.E.2d 123 (finding that a month-and-a-half delay in filing a transcript was unreasonable and prevented docketing of the appeal on the earliest possible calendar); Hameed v. Hall, 234 Ga.App. 890, 892(1), 508 S.E.2d 680 (1998) (finding that a 72–day delay in filing a transcript identified in the notice of appeal was unreasonable and inexcusable regardless of whether that transcript was necessary); Lindstrom v. Forsyth Co