Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

SPIVEY v. ROGERS et al.

QUILLIAN, Presiding Judge.

Appeal was taken from an order dismissing the plaintiff's cross-complaint against an added party and assigning the remainder of the cause (involving the defendant's counterclaim against the plaintiff) for jury trial. Held:

Where there is a case involving multiple parties or multiple claims, a decision adjudicating fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of less than all the parties is not a final judgment. OCGA § 9-11-54 (Code Ann. § 81A-154). In such circumstances, there must be an express determination under OCGA § 9-11-54 (b) (Code Ann. § 81A-11-54) or there must be compliance with the requirements of OCGA § 5-6-34 (b) (Code Ann. § 6-701). Where neither of these code sections are followed as in this case, the appeal is premature and must be dismissed. Myers v. Mobil America Corp., 132 Ga. App. 331 ( 208 S.E.2d 169); Johnson v. Martin, 132 Ga. App. 813 ( 209 S.E.2d 256); Hancock v. Oates, 244 Ga. 175, 177 ( 259 S.E.2d 437).

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

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 6, 1983.
Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SPIVEY v. ROGERS
(Sep 6, 1983)