# 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 :

A1 8 D0 53 8 . DARREN PETTY v . W I LLI AM COREY.

In t h i s d i s p o ss es s o ry

act i o n b ro u g h t b y

W i l l iam Co rey

, ag ai n s t Darren Pet t y

,

t h e m ag i s t ra t e c ou rt i s su ed a wri t o f po s s es s i o n in fav o r of Co ry o n J u n e 1 2

, 2 0 1 8.

Pet t y fi l ed t h i s pro se ap p l i cat i o n fo r di s cret io n ary ap peal on J u l y 3

, 2 01 8

. 1 W e,

h o wev er, l ack ju ri s di ct i o n.

Gen eral ly, “ [t ] h e on l y av en u e o f ap p eal av ai l ab l e fro m [a] m ag i s t rat e co u rt

ju d g m en t i s pro v i d ed b y OCGA § 1 5-1 0 -4 1 (b ) (1 ), wh i ch al l o ws fo r a d e n o vo ap p eal

t o t h e s t at e o r s u p eri o r co u rt .” H a n d l er v. Hu ls ey

, 1 9 9 Ga. Ap p

. 7 5 1, 75 1 (4 0 6 SE2 d

2 2 5 ) (1 9 91 ). Th i s Co u rt m ay o n l y ad d res s m ag i st rat e co u rt m at t ers t h at al read y h av e

b een rev i ewed by th e s t at e o r s u p eri o r co u rt

. See W es t wi n d Co rp

. v. W

a s h i n g t o n Fed

.

S & L As s n

. , 1 9 5 Ga. A p p. 4 1 1

, 4 1 1 (1 ) (3 9 3 SE2 d 4 7 9) (1 9 9 0 ); s ee al s o O CGA § 5

-

6 -3 5 (a) (1 ), (a) (1 1). Here, t h e o n l y o rd er i n th e ap p l i cat i o n m at eri al s was i s s u ed by

t h e m ag i s t rat e co u rt

, wh i ch ap p ears no t t o h av e b een rev i ewed b y a s t at e o r s u p eri o r

co u rt

. 2

M o reo v er, ord in ari l y

, an ap p l i cat io n fo r d i scret i o nary ap p eal m us t b e fi l ed

wi t h i n 3 0 d ay s o f en t ry o f t h e o rd er s o u g h t t o b e ap p eal ed

. O CGA § 5-6 -3 5 (d ). Th e

1 Pet t y at t em

p t ed t o fi l e h i s ap p l i cat io n earl i er, b u t h i s ap p l i cat i o n w as ret u rn ed

b ecau s e i t d i d n o t i n cl u d e a s tam p ed “ fi l ed ” co p y o f t h e o rd er s o u g h t t o b e ap p eal ed

.

2 I n h i s ap p l icat i o n, Pet t y s t at es t h at he i s s eek i n g “ rev ers al o f an o rd er o f

DEKALB Co u n t y St at e C o u r t u p h o l d i n g a d eci s i o n o f t he DEKALB Co u n t y St at e

Co u rt .” Ho w ev er, as s t at ed ab o v e, t h e o n l y o r d er i n cl u d ed wi t h th e ap p l i cat i o n

m at eri al s i s fro m

t h e m ag is t rat e co u rt

. July 17, 2018u n d erl y i n g s u b ject m at t er o f an ap p eal

, ho wev er, co nt ro l s o v er t h e r e l i e f s o u g h t in

d et erm i n i n g t h e p ro p er ap p el lat e p ro ced u re. Reb i ch v. Mi les

, 26 4 Ga. 4 6 7

, 4 6 7 -4 6 8

(4 4 8 SE2 d 19 2 ) (1 9 94 ). Th e u n d erl y i n g s u b ject m at t er h ere i s a d i s p o s s es s o ry act i o n.

OCGA § 4 4 -7 -5 6 pro v i d es t h at an ap p eal fro m an y d i s p o s s es s o ry ju d g m en t m u s t b e

f i l e d wi t h i n s ev en d ay s o f t h e d at e t h e ju d g m en t was en tered

. See Ra y M. W r i g h t

,

In c. v. Jo n es

, 2 3 9 Ga. Ap p

. 5 2 1, 5 2 2 -5 2 3 ( 5 2 1 SE2 d 4 5 6 ) (1 9 9 9). Becau s e Pet t y ’ s

a p p l i cat i o n was fi l ed 2 1 day s aft er t h e m ag i s t rat e co u rt ’ s o rd er was en t ered

, t hi s

ap p li cat io n i s u n t i m el y . Acco rd i n g l y , t h i s ap p li cat i o n i s h ereb y DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e

, A t la n t a

,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

.

W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 07/17/2018