# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 4 D0 21 7 . SHOHEL MOMI N v . J EREMY ANDERSON et a l

.

B a sed o n the limited ap p lic atio n materials, it ap pears that Pearl Gard en H o mes, LLC and Go o d so n, LLC bro ught t his p ro perty disp u te against J eremy and Trac i
A nd erso n. The A nd erso ns then f iled a third -p arty co mp laint against Sho hel M o m in,
RW I nv estments, L L C, a nd Ric hard W alk e r. M o min f iled a mo tio n f

o r su mmary j u d gment, w hic h t he trial c o u rt granted

. M o min then filed a m o t io n s eek ing atto rney f ees u nd er OCGA § 9

- 1 5- 1 4. T he trial c o u rt denied that mo tio n, and Mo min no w seek s d isc retio nary rev iew

. W e, ho w ev er, lac k j u risd ic tio n. Generally, a p arty mu st f

o llo w the d isc retio nary ap peal p ro c ed u res to ap p eal an

o rd er aw ard ing or denying OCGA § 9

- 1 5- 1 4 atto rney f ee s

. S ee OCGA § 5- 6

- 35 (a) (1 0). This ac tio n, ho w ev er, inv o lv e s m u ltip le p arties and c laims, a nd t h e m a t e rials that
M o min su b m i t t ed w ith his ap p lic atio n c o ntain no ind ic atio n that the trial co u rt has ad j u d ic ated any c laims other than the t h i r d

- p arty c laims against M o min. Thu s, it

ap p ears that this ac t io n r emains p end ing belo w and that the o r d er M o min w ishes to

ap p eal is interlo c u to ry. See E ids o n v

. C ro u tch , 337 Ga. A p p

. 542, 543- 544 (7 88 SE2d

1 29 ) (201 6 ) (ho ld ing that an aw ard o f a tto rney f ees issu e d bef

o re f inal ju d g m e n t is interlo c u to ry). Und e r these c irc u m stanc e s, Mo m in w as requ ired to f ollo w the interlo c u to ry ap p e al pro c e d ures set f o rth in OCGA § 5- 6

- 34 (b), inc lu d ing o btaining

a c ertif ic ate o f immed iate rev iew , to p u rsu e an ap p eal at this j u nc tu re. 1 See Ba i ley v

.

1 Perhap s in rec ognitio n o f this f ac t, M o m in styl e d t he ap p lic atio n a s o ne f o r interlo c u to ry rev iew

. B u t w itho u t t he c ertif ic a te o f immed iate rev iew requ ired by OCGA § 5- 6

- 34 (b), w e d oc k eted the ap p lic atio n as o ne f o r d isc retio nary rev iew

. February 02, 2024Ba i

l e y , 26 6 G a. 832, 833 (47 1 SE2d 21 3) (1 9 9 6 ); S c ru ggs v

. Ga

. D ept. o

f Hu ma n Res o u rces , 26 1 G a. 587 , 588- 589 (1 ) (408 SE2d 1 03) (1 9 9 1 ). A ltho u gh M o min f iled an
ap p lic atio n f

o r disc retio nary ap peal, as d esc ribed in OCGA § 5- 6

- 35, c o mp lianc e w ith that p ro c ed u r e d o es no t exc u se a p arty seek ing ap p ellate rev iew o f an interlo c u t o ry

o rd er f ro m c o mp lying w ith t he ad d itio nal requ irements of OCGA § 5- 6- 34 (b). See
Ba i ley , 26 6 G a

. at 8 3 3 ; E i

ds o n , 337 Ga. A pp

. at 543. M o min’ s f ailu re to f o llo w the interlo c u to ry ap p eal p ro c ed u res d ep riv es u s o f j urisd i c t i o n to co nsid er this

ap p lic atio n, w hic h is hereby D I SM I SSED

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a ls o f t h e S t a t e o f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O ffic e , A t la n t a ,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t ify t h a t t h e a b o v e is a t

r u e e x t r a c t f r o m
t h e m in u t e s o f t h e C o u r t o f A pp e a ls o f G e o r g ia

. W it n e s s m y s ig n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o f s a id c o u r t h e r e t o a ffix e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r la s t a b o v e w r

it t e n

.

, C le r

k

. 02/02/2024