From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Strom v. London

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 11, 2002
257 Ga. App. 889 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002)

Opinion

A02A1480.

Decided October 11, 2002.

Domicile. DeKalb Superior Court. Before Judge Hicks, Senior Judge.

Carlock, Copeland, Semler Stair, Thomas S. Carlock, Alwyn R. Fredericks, for appellants. Lamar, Archer Cofrin, David W. Davenport, Katherine A. Eichelberger, for appellee.


Appellants Priscilla Strom and Gainesville Surgical Associates have failed to file an enumeration of errors as required by OCGA § 5-6-40, either separately or as part of their brief. See Georgia Court of Appeals Rule 22(a) (enumeration of errors shall be Part 2 of appellant's brief and need not be filed separately) Rule 27(a)(2) (Part 2 of the appellant's brief shall consist of the enumeration of errors). "This Court and the Supreme Court of Georgia have made clear that failure to file an enumeration of errors requires dismissal of an appeal. . . . [Cits.]" Miles v. Emmons, 234 Ga. App. 487, 487 ( 507 S.E.2d 762) (1998); see Lowery v. Smith, 225 Ga. 814, 814 ( 171 S.E.2d 500) (1969) ("The appellant has failed to file an enumeration of errors, as is required by the Appellate Practice Act. [Cits.] Therefore the appeal must be dismissed."). Cf. Felix v. State, 271 Ga. 534, 539 ( 523 S.E.2d 1) (1999) ("In order for a Georgia appellate court to review a trial court ruling for legal error, a party must set forth in the enumeration of errors the allegedly erroneous ruling. OCGA § 5-6-40. The appellate court is precluded from reviewing the propriety of a lower court's ruling if the ruling is not contained in the enumeration of errors. [Cits.]"). Accordingly, this appeal must be dismissed.

Moreover, we note that the primary issue contested in appellants' brief is a factual finding by the trial court that appellant Strom resided indifferently at two places and that no evidence showed that any election by her of the Gainesville residence as her domicile was generally known among those with whom she transacted business in this State. See OCGA § 19-2-2(a). As evidence supported the trial court's findings, the appeal lacked merit in any case. See Allen v. McDermott, 110 Ga. App. 536, 538(2) ( 139 S.E.2d 143) (1964) (findings of fact on residency are upheld if supported by evidence).

Appeal dismissed. BLACKBURN, C. J., and JOHNSON, P.J., concur.


DECIDED OCTOBER 11, 2002.


Summaries of

Strom v. London

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 11, 2002
257 Ga. App. 889 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002)
Case details for

Strom v. London

Case Details

Full title:STROM et al. v. LONDON

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Oct 11, 2002

Citations

257 Ga. App. 889 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002)
572 S.E.2d 409

Citing Cases

State v. McClendon

Taylor v. Columbia County Planning Comm., 232 Ga. 155, 157 ( 205 SE2d 287) (1974). See Lowery v. Smith, 225…

Blockum v. Fieldale Farms Corp.

Miles v. Emmons, 234 Ga. App. 487 ( 507 SE2d 762) (1998) ("[t]his Court and the Supreme Court of Georgia have…