SAVAGE v. NEWSOME

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

69536.

Attorney(S)

Leon Savage, pro se. John C. Jones, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Judges

BANKE, Chief Judge.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The plaintiff, an inmate at Georgia State Prison, filed suit against the warden and other prison officials seeking damages for the alleged destruction of his radio during a cell search. A jury found in favor of the defendants, and the trial court entered judgment on June 19, 1984. Subsequently, the defendants moved for an assessment of costs against the plaintiff, which the trial court granted on July 20, 1984, ordering $99 in costs to be collected from the plaintiff's inmate account. The plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of this costs order was denied on August 9, 1984. The plaintiff then filed a notice of appeal from the denial of the motion for reconsideration on August 22, 1984.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the denial of a motion for reconsideration of an appealable order or judgment is itself appealable.
Whether the plaintiff’s appeal, filed after the denial of the motion for reconsideration, was timely.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent	Rule or Principle Cited For	Application by the Court
Becker v. Fairman, 167 Ga. App. 708 (307 S.E.2d 520) (1983)	The denial of a motion for reconsideration of an appealable order or judgment is not itself appealable and does not extend the time for filing a notice of appeal.	The court applied this principle to hold that the plaintiff’s appeal, filed after the denial of reconsideration, was untimely and therefore must be dismissed.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court reasoned that the denial of a motion for reconsideration does not constitute an appealable order and does not extend the deadline for filing an appeal. Because the plaintiff filed his notice of appeal more than 30 days after the original order assessing costs, the appeal was untimely under the applicable Georgia statutes (OCGA §§ 5-6-38(a) and 5-6-48(b)(1)). Consequently, the court concluded that the appeal must be dismissed.

Holding and Implications

Holding: The appeal is DISMISSED as untimely.

Implications: The decision bars the plaintiff from pursuing appellate review of the costs order due to procedural default. No new legal precedent was established; the ruling reaffirmed existing principles regarding the non-appealability of reconsideration denials and strict adherence to appeal deadlines.

Show full summary ...

SAVAGE v. NEWSOME.

BANKE, Chief Judge.

The plaintiff, an inmate of the Georgia State Prison at Reidsville, Georgia, filed suit against the warden and other prison officials to recover damages for the alleged destruction of his radio during a search of his cell. A jury found in favor of the defendants; and on June 19, 1984, the trial court entered judgment on this verdict. In response to a subsequent motion by the defendants for an assessment of costs against the plaintiff, the trial court on July 20, 1984, entered an order assessing costs against the plaintiff in the amount of $99 and allowing these costs to be collected from any monies on deposit in the plaintiff's inmate account at the prison. On August 9, 1984, the trial court denied a motion by the plaintiff for reconsideration of this order. The plaintiff filed a notice of appeal from the denial of this motion for reconsideration on August 22, 1984. Held:

It is well established that the denial of a motion for reconsideration of an appealable order or judgment is not itself appealable and does not extend the time for filing a notice of appeal. See Becker v. Fairman, 167 Ga. App. 708 (1) ( 307 S.E.2d 520) (1983). The plaintiff's appeal not having been filed within 30 days of the entry of the order assessing costs against him, it follows that the appeal must be dismissed as untimely. See generally OCGA §§ 5-6-38 (a) and 5-6-48 (b) (1).

Appeal dismissed. Pope and Benham, JJ., concur.

DECIDED JANUARY 11, 1985.