# 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 9 A1 23 3

. CASSANDRA R. DAN-FODI O et al

. v

. W I LMI N GTON SAVI NGS

FUND SOCI ETY, FSB.

Th i s d i s po s ses s o ry act io n o ri g i nat ed i n m ag i s trat e co u rt

. Fo l l o wi n g an ad v ers e

ru l i n g, Cas s an dra R. Dan -Fo d i o an d M u s a D an -Fo d i o (t h e “ Ap p el l an ts ”) ap p eal ed to

t h e s u p eri o r co u rt

. Th e s u p eri o r co u rt g ran t ed W i l m i n gt o n Sav i n gs Fu n d So ci et y , FSB’ s m o ti o n fo r s u m

m ary ju d g m en t an d o rd ered t h e i s s u an ce o f a wri t o f

p o s s es s i o n

. T h e Ap p el l an t s th en fi l ed an ap p l i cat i o n fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal

, wh i ch

we d en i ed

. S e e Cas e No

. A1 9 D0 2 4 3 (d eci d ed J an

. 1 0

, 2 0 1 9 ). Th ey al s o fi l ed t h i s

d i rect ap p eal

, an d W i l m i n gt on Sav i n gs fi led a m o t i o n t o d is m i s s

. W e l ack j u ri s d i ct i o n

fo r s ev eral reas o n s

. Ap p eal s fro m s u peri o r co u rt d eci s i o n s rev i ewi n g lo wer co u rt d eci s i o n s by

ce r t i o r a r i o r d e n o v o p ro ceed i n g s m u st b e in i t i at ed b y fi l i ng an ap pl i cat i o n fo r

d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal

. OCGA § 5 -6 -3 5 (a) (1 ), (b ); Bu l l o ck v. Sa n d

, 2 6 0 Ga. Ap p

. 8 7 4,

8 7 5 (5 8 1 SE2 d 3 3 3 ) (2 00 3 ). “ Co m p l ian ce wi t h t h e d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal s p ro ced u re

i s ju ri s d i ct i o n al .” S

mo a k v. Dep t

. of Hu ma n Res o u rces , 2 2 1 Ga. Ap p

. 2 5 7

, 2 5 7 (4 7 1

SE2 d 6 0 ) (1 9 9 6). Th e A p pel l an t s ’ fai l u re t o fo l l o w t h e p ro p er p ro ced u re d ep ri v es u s

o f ju ri s d ict i o n o v er t hi s ap p eal . See Bu ll o ck , 2 6 0 Ga. Ap p . at 8 7 5

. Th e Ap p e l l an t s co n t en d t h at t h ey are en t i t l ed t o a d irect ap peal b ecau s e t h e

s u p eri o r co u r t l a c k e d ju ri s di ct i o n t o en t er it s fi n al o rd er an d b ecau s e t h e s u p eri o r

co u rt ’ s o rd er was v o id

. Ho wev er, s u ch an arg u m en t d oes n o t ex cu s e t h e Ap p el l an t s

fro m co m p ly i n g wi th t he di s cret i o n ary ap p eal p ro ced u re. See Is l a mkh an v. Kh a n , 2 9 9

Ga. 54 8

, 5 4 9 -5 5 0 (7 8 7 SE2 d 7 3 1 ) (2 0 1 6 ) (co n si deri n g w h et h er a ju d g m en t was v o id

o n l y aft er g ran t in g t h e ap p el lan t ’ s ap pl i cat i o n fo r d i s c r e t i o n ary ap p eal ); Mu r p h y v. March 12, 2019Mu r

p h y , 2 6 3 Ga. 2 80 , 2 8 1 (4 3 0 SE2 d 7 4 9 ) (1 9 9 3 ) (s am e).

Fi n al l y , o ur d en i al o f t h e Ap p el l an t s ’ ap p l i cat i o n fo r d i scret i o nary ap p eal was

an ad ju d i cat i o n o n th e m eri ts

, an d t h erefo re t h e d oct ri n e o f res ju d i cat a b ars t h i s d i rect

ap p eal fro m t h e s am e t ri al co u rt o rd er. S e e N o r t h w e s t S

o ci a l & Ci vi c Cl u b

, In c. v.

Fr a nkl in

, 2 7 6 G a. 8 5 9

, 86 0 (5 83 SE2 d 8 58 ) (2 0 0 3 ); Ho o k v. Ber g en , 2 8 6 Ga

. A p p.

2 5 8 , 2 6 0 -2 6 1 (1 ) (6 4 9 SE2 d 3 1 3 ) (2 0 0 7 ).

Fo r t h es e reas o n s, t he W i l m i n g t o n Sav i n g s’ s m o t i on t o d is m i ss i s GRANTED,

an d t h is ap p eal i s h ereb y

DISM ISSED fo r l ack o f ju ri s d i ct io n

.

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

. 03/12/2019