# 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 :

A 2 0 A 0 0 3 1

. M ARTHA JACKSON v

. GEORGI A DEPARTMENT OF

TRANSPORTATI ON.

M art h a J ack s o n fi l ed a co m p l ai n t ag ai n s t t he Geo rg i a Dep a r t m e n t o f

Tran s p ort at i o n (“ GDOT”), Reev es Co n st ru ct i o n Co m p an y , In c

. (“ Reev es

Co n s t ru ct i o n ”), an d th ree u n i d en t i fi ed i nd i v i d u al s (“ J o hn Do e I, J oh n Do e II

, a n d

J o h n Do e III”), fo r i n

ju ri es s h e s us t ai n ed wh en sh e fe l l i n t o a s t o rm d rai n

. Sh e

as s ert ed a cl ai m fo r n eg l i gen ce, an d c l ai m s fo r n eg li gen t hi ri ng , t rai n i n g , an d

s u p erv i s i o n , ag ai n s t each d efen d an t

. 1 Th e t ri al co u rt g ran ted Reev es Co n s t ru ct i o n ’ s

m o ti o n fo r s u m

m ary j u d gm en t an d d i s m i s sed Jack s o n’ s cas e ag ai n s t i t wi t h p reju d i ce.

Th e co u rt l at er g ran ted G DOT’ s m o t i o n t o di s m i s s fi n d i n g t hat GDOT h ad n o t wai v ed

i t s s o v erei g n i m

m u n i ty

. Jack s o n fi l ed a t i m el y n o ti ce o f ap p eal s eek i ng rev i ew o f t h e

t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f GDOT’ s m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s

.

“ In a cas e in v o l v i n g m

u l t i p l e p art i es o r m

ul t i p l e cl ai m s , a d eci si o n ad ju d i cat i n g

fewer t han al l t h e cl ai m s o r t h e ri g h t s an d l iab i l i t i es o f les s t h an al l t h e part i es i s n ot

a fi nal ju d g m en t

. ” (Pu n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Jo h n s o n v. Ho s p. C o rp

. o f Amer i ca
, 1 9 2 Ga.

Ap p

. 62 8

, 62 9 (3 8 5 S E 2 d 7 3 1 ) (1 98 9 ). Al t h o u g h Reev es Co n s t ru ct i o n an d GDOT

were d i sm i s sed fro m t he act i on , t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s ord ers are s il en t as t o th e rem ai n i n g

u n i d en t i fi ed i n d iv i d u al s

. J ack s o n ’ s cl ai m s ag ai n s t t h o s e i n di v i d u al s h a v e t h erefo re

1 J ack so n ’ s am en d ed co m p l ai n t fi l ed o n Feb ru ary 1 2, 2 0 1 8

, d o es n ot as s ert an y cl ai m s ag ai n s t J o hn Do e I. August 08, 2019n o t b een ad

ju d i cat ed

. 2 “ In s u ch ci r c um sta nc e s, t h ere m

us t b e an ex p res s d et erm i n at i o n

u n d er OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 4 (b ) o r t h ere m u s t b e co m

pl i an ce wi t h t h e i n t erl o cu t ory ap p eal

r e q u i rem en t s o f O CGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (b ). W here n ei t her o f t h es e co d e s ect io n s [ i s ]

fo l l o w ed

, t h e ap p eal i s prem at u re an d m u s t be d i s m i s s ed .” (Ci t at i o n s an d pu n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed .) Id

. Th e tri al co u rt ’ s o rd er in t h i s cas e di d n o t d irect t h e en t ry o f ju d g m en t p u rs u an t

t o OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 4 (b ). Th erefo re, t h e ch al l en g ed o rd er i s n o t a fi n al o rd er, an d i t i s

ap p eal ab l e o n l y t h ro u g h t h e in t erl o cu t ory ap p eal p ro ced u res s et fo rt h i n OCGA § 5 -6

-
3 4 (b ). Sh oen t h a l v. S

h o en t ha l

, 3 3 3 Ga. Ap p

. 7 2 9

, 7 3 0 (7 7 6 SE2 d 66 3 ) (2 0 15 );

Jo h ns o n , s up ra, 1 92 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 2 9

. J ack s on ’ s fai l u re t o fo l lo w t h e p ro p er ap p el l at e

p ro ced ure d ep ri v es u s o f ju ri sd i ct i o n t o co n s i d er t h i s d i rect ap p eal

, wh i ch 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 ti 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 t 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 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

.

2 Th e “ J o h n Do e” d efen d an t s rem ai n , at t h i s t i m e, u n i d en ti fi ed

. Bu t i f an d wh en

t h e pl ai n t i ffs d i s co v er t h ei r i d en t i t i es , u n der OCGA § 9-1 1 -1 5 (c), t h ey m ay “ am en d

t h e ori g in al p l ead i n g s s o as t o ch an g e t h e p art y ag ai n st wh o m a cl ai m is as s ert ed .” (Pu n ct u at i on o m i tt ed .) Ro b in s on v. Es t a te o f Jes t er , 3 3 3 Ga. Ap p

. 4 1

, 4 3 (7 7 5 SE2 d

5 6 9 ) (2 0 1 5 ). M ore o v e r , f or p u rp o s es o f ren ewi n g a s ui t u n d er OCGA § 9-2 -6 1

, an

“ o ri g i n al s u i t is v o i d i f serv i ce was n ev er p erfect ed

, s i n ce th e fi l i ng of a co m p l ai nt
wi t h o u t perfect i n g s erv i ce d o es n o t co n st it u t e a pen d i ng su i t

. . . . H o wev er, u n l es s an d

u n t i l t h e t ri al co u rt en t ers an o rd er d i s m i s s i ng a v al i d act i o n, i t i s m erel y v o i d ab l e an d

n o t v o id .” Ho b b s v. Ar t h u r , 2 6 4 Ga. 3 5 9

, 3 60 (4 4 4 SE2 d 3 2 2 ) (1 9 9 4 ). Here, al t h o u g h

t h e un i d en t i fi ed d efen dan t s h av e n o t b een s erv ed

, s erv i ce was p erfect ed o n GDOT

an d Reev es Co n s t ru ct i o n

. Acco rd i n g l y , t h e s u i t i s n o t v o i d. A n d t h e t ri al co u rt
d i s m i s s ed t h e co m

p l ai n t ag ai n s t GDOT an d Reev es Co n s t ru ct i o n ; i t d i d n o t d i s m i ss

t h e en t i re act i on

. 08/08/2019