Case ID: ga-app_193/html/0009-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Carley, Chief Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

A89A1041.
    FASSE v. SEXTON et al.
    (387 SE2d 17)
    Decided September 25, 1989.
    Susan Fasse, pro se.
    
    
      Davis, Kirsch & Wolfe, Timothy W. Wolfe, for appellees.
   Carley, Chief Judge.

Appellee-defendant answered appellant-plaintiff’s complaint and asserted a counterclaim. Acting pursuant to OCGA §§ 9-11-37 (b) (2) (C) and 9-11-37 (d) (1), the trial court subsequently dismissed appellant’s complaint as a sanction for her repeated failure to attend scheduled depositions. Appellant has filed a direct appeal from the order dismissing her complaint.

Appellees’ counterclaim remains pending. “ ‘An appeal from an order dismissing the plaintiff’s claim is premature when there is a counterclaim pending in the court below.’ [Cits.] . . . [T]he pendency of the counterclaim plus the absence of a determination by the trial judge that there was no just reason for delay and express direction for entry of judgment under CPA § 54 (b) [OCGA § 9-11-54 (b)] ([cits.]) prevented the order from being final and [directly] appealable. This, coupled with the appellant’s failure to follow the applicable procedure for review under [OCGA § 5-6-34 (b)] ([Cits.]), subjects the instant appeal to dismissal [as premature].” Cleveland v. Watkins, 159 Ga. App. 885 (285 SE2d 546) (1981).

Appeal dismissed.

McMurray, P. J., and Beasley, J., concur.