Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A21A0607. HEATHER WRYE v. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE STUDENT

LOAN TRUST 2005-2 et al.

Heather Wrye filed this appeal pursuant to OCGA § 38-3-64, seeking to

challenge the constitutional application of the judicial emergency ordersissued by the

Georgia Supreme Court pursuant to OCGA § 38-3-61

1

in this garnishment action.

Specifically, Wrye contends that her rights have been adversely affected because the

stay orders unlawfully expanded the trial court’s in rem subject-matter jurisdiction to

reach and include wages earned outside the period of garnishment established by

OCGA § 18-4-4 (c) (providing that in a continuing garnishment action, the

garnishment period shall begin on the day of service of the summons of garnishment

and shall include the next 179 days).2 However, we conclude that this appeal should

be transferred to the Georgia Supreme Court, which has exclusive jurisdiction over

“[a]ll cases involving the construction of . . . the Constitution of the State of Georgia

or of the United States and all casesin which the constitutionality of a law, ordinance,

or constitutional provision has been drawn in question.” Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI,

Sec. VI, Par. II (1);see also Atlanta Independent School System v. Lane, 266 Ga. 657,

1

SeeChief JusticeMelton’s SupremeCourt Order Declaring Statewide Judicial

Emergency (Mar. 14, 2020), as extended on April 6, May 11, and June 12, 2020, and

as extended in part on July 10, August 6, and September 10, 2020, available at

www.gasupreme.us.

2 Effective January 1, 2021, the garnishment period will be extended to 1,095

days. 

November 09, 2020
657 (1) (469 SE2d 22) (1996). 

The Georgia Court of Appeals has only “limited jurisdiction to review

constitutional questions,” which arises when the facts of the case “do not involve

construction of some constitutional provision directly in question and doubtful either

under its own terms or under the decisions of the Supreme Court of Georgia or the

Supreme Court of the United States.” State v. Davis, 303 Ga. 684, 687-688 (1) (814

SE2d 701) (2018) (punctuation omitted). The instant appeal involvesthe construction

of the garnishment statutes and how the statutes should be construed in the context

of comporting with the Supreme Court’s judicial emergency orders, which,

unsurprisingly, has not previously been addressed in this State. See id. (holding that

the Georgia Supreme Court had jurisdiction over a “constitutional question of first

impression,” when the constitutional provision in question with respect to sex

offender registration had not previously been addressed); State Dept. of Corrections

v. Developers Sur. & Indem. Co., 295 Ga. 741, 742 n. 2 (763 SE2d 868) (2014) (“An

appeal requiring a first impression construction of the sovereign immunity provision

of the Georgia Constitution is within [the Georgia Supreme] Court’s exclusive

appellate jurisdiction.”). Indeed, implicit in Wrye’s appeal is the contention that the

Supreme Court’s judicial emergency orders cannot toll the garnishment period

provided in OCGA § 18-4-4 (c).

Consequently, it appears that jurisdiction over the instant appeals lies in the

Georgia Supreme Court. While we acknowledge that the question of appellate

jurisdiction is subject to differing reasonable conclusions, we note that the Supreme

Court has “the ultimate responsibility for construing the constitutional provisions

regarding appellate jurisdiction.” Saxton v. Coastal Dialysis & Med. Clinic, 267 Ga.

177, 178 (476 SE2d 587) (1996). We also acknowledge that OCGA § 38-3-64 (c)

provides in pertinent part that an appeal of an order declaring the existence of a

judicial emergency “shall be heard immediately by the Georgia Court of Appeals

under the procedure of emergency motions.” Nevertheless, we have reviewed this

appeal in an expedited manner, and note that even if OCGA § 38-3-64 (c) and the

provision of the Georgia Constitution regarding appellate jurisdiction over
constitutional questions are in conflict, the latter would control. See MARTA v. Buho,

353 Ga. App. 466, 468 (838 SE2d 130) (2020) (to the extent a statutory rule

contradicts a constitutional rule, the constitutional rule prevails). Here, the

constitutionality regarding the Supreme Court’s judicial emergency orders’ ability to

toll the time period provided in OCGA § 18-4-4 (c) has been brought into question,

and jurisdiction therefore appears to be proper in the Georgia Supreme Court.

For the foregoing reasons, this appeal is hereby TRANSFERRED to the

Georgia Supreme Court for disposition. 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

11/09/2020