Title: Sellers v. Nodvin

State: georgia

Issuer: Georgia Supreme Court

Document:

262 Ga. 205 (1992) 415 S.E.2d 908 SELLERS et al. v. NODVIN et al. S92G0203. Supreme Court of Georgia. Decided May 11, 1992. Fred L. Cavalli, for appellants. Richard A. Gordon, for appellees. Marvin P. Nodvin, pro se. WELTNER, Presiding Justice. The trial court dismissed Sellers' appeal for failure to file a transcript in a timely manner, pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-48.[1] We granted certiorari to consider "whether the Court of Appeals applied the correct standard to determine whether the delay was unreasonable." Sellers v. Nodvin, 201 Ga. App. 550 (411 SE2d 723) (1991). 1. (a) In Young v. Climatrol Southeast Distributing Corp., 237 *206 Ga. 53 (226 SE2d 737) (1976), we stated: Compare Baker v. Southern R. Co., 260 Ga. 115 (390 SE2d 576) (1990).[2] (b) In Galletta v. Hillcrest Abbey West, 185 Ga. App. 20 (1) (363 SE2d 265) (1987), the Court of Appeals stated: The court noted that in that case, although the transcript was 11 days late, See also McDonald v. Garden Services, 251 Ga. 337 (304 SE2d 914) (1983), Justice Bell, dissenting, joined by two justices, which urges similar criteria as a standard for determining the reasonableness of delay. 2. (a) The trial court held: (b) The uncontradicted evidence at the hearing was that the delay in filing the transcript did not delay transmission of the record to *208 the Court of Appeals.[3] 3. That being so, and there being no evidence of any of the other elements mentioned in Galletta, the trial court's express finding that the delay was unreasonable so as to warrant dismissal was an abuse of discretion under the standard set in Galletta. Judgment reversed. All the Justices concur. [1] OCGA § 5-6-48 (c) provides: No appeal shall be dismissed by the appellate court nor consideration of any error therein refused because of failure of any party to cause the transcript of evidence and proceedings to be filed within the time allowed by law or order of court; but the trial court may, after notice and opportunity for hearing, order that the appeal be dismissed where there has been an unreasonable delay in the filing of the transcript and it is shown that the delay was inexcusable and was caused by such party. In like manner, the trial court may order the appeal dismissed where there has been an unreasonable delay in the transmission of the record to the appellate court, and it is seen that the delay was inexcusable and was caused by the failure of a party to pay costs in the trial court or file an affidavit of indigence; provided, however, that no appeal shall be dismissed for failure to pay costs if costs are paid within 20 days (exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays) of receipt by the appellant of notice, mailed by registered or certified mail, of the amount of costs. OCGA § 5-6-48 (f) provides, in part: An appeal shall not be dismissed nor consideration thereof refused because of failure of the court reporter to file the transcript of evidence and proceedings within the time allowed by law or order of court unless it affirmatively appears from the record that the failure was caused by the appellant. OCGA § 5-6-42 provides, in part: Where there is a transcript of evidence and proceedings to be included in the record on appeal, the appellant shall cause the transcript to be prepared and filed as provided by Code Section 5-6-41.... The party having the responsibility of filing the transcript shall cause it to be filed within 30 days after filing of the notice of appeal... unless the time is extended as provided in Code Section 5-6-39. [2] In Baker, the disposition of the case revolved around whether the responsible party had "caused" the delay. In this case, the issue is the reasonableness of the delay, not whether it was inexcusable. Accord Wagner v. Howell, 257 Ga. 801 (363 SE2d 759) (1988). [3] Testimony at the hearing of December 18, 1990, includes the following: Nodvin received a copy of the transcript sometime in September 1990. The notice of appeal was filed October 3, 1990. On November 8, 1990, the appeals clerk of the state court sent Sellers a bill for costs, noting that preparation of the appeal record would not commence until payment was received. Sellers paid the bill on November 29, 1990. On December 17, 45 days after the time for filing the transcript had expired, Nodvin filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. Sellers filed the transcript at that time. The appeal clerk testified at the hearing that the appeal record would not be ready for another four weeks.