# 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 37 1 . TONI A BERRY v . BOW EN STRAHAN.

Defen d an t To n i a Berry s eek s d i s cret i o n ary rev i ew of a t ria l c our t or d er d en y i n g

h er m o ti o n t o en fo rce a s et t l em en t ag reem en t an d award i n g s an ct i o n s u n d er OCGA

§ 9 -1 5-1 4 (a). W e, h o w ev er, l ack ju ri s di ct i on

.

Th e ap p li cat i o n m at eri al s s h o w t h at Pl ai n t i ff Bo wen St rah an s u s t ai n ed i n ju ri es

wh en h er v eh i cl e co l l id ed wi t h Berry ’ s v eh i cl e. St rah an m ad e an o ffer o f co m p ro m i s e

u n d er OCGA § 9-1 1 -6 7

. 1 t o Nat i o n wi d e A f f i n i t y In s u ran ce Co m

pan y o f Am eri ca,

Berry ’ s i ns u rer. W h en Nat i o n wi d e fai l ed t o accep t t h e o ffer, St rah an fi led s u i t ag ai n s t

Berry

. Berry t h en fi led a m o t i o n t o en f o r c e s et t l em en t

, cl ai m i n g Nat i on wi d e h ad

accep t ed St rah an ’ s s et t l em en t o ffer. Th e t ri al c o u r t den i ed t he m o t io n

. In ad d i t i o n,

“ [b ] ecau se t h ere ex i st ed s u c h a c o m p l et e ab s en ce o f an y ju s ti ci ab l e i s s u e o f l aw o r

fact t h at i t co u l d b e reas o n ab l y b el i ev ed t h at t h e Co urt w o u l d accep t t he Defen d an t ’ s

M o t i on t o En fo rce Set t l em en t ,” t h e co u rt g ran t ed St rah an ’ s m o ti o n fo r san ct i o n s an d

i n d i cat ed t h at a h e a ri n g wo u l d b e s ch ed u l ed t o p res en t ev i d en ce o f St rah an ’ s

at t o rn ey ’ s fees a n d ex p en s es in cu rred in res po n d i n g t o Berry ’ s m o t i o n to en fo rce

s et t l em en t

.

Berry fi led th i s ap p l i cat i o n fo r d i scret i o nary ap peal

, arg u i n g

, in t er al i a, t h at t h e

o rd er d en y i n g t he m o t i o n to en fo rce s et t l em en t i s d irect l y ap p e al ab l e u n d er t h e

co l l at eral o rd er d o ct ri ne an d t h at th i s co u rt m ay rev i ew t h e p o rt i o n o f t h e o rd er

i m p o s i n g s an ct i o n s wi th o u t n eed fo r an ap p l i cat i o n . W e d i s ag ree an d co ncl u d e t h at

we l ack ju ri s d ict i o n b ecau s e t h e i n t erl o cu t o ry ap p eal pro ced u res were n o t fo l l o wed

.

OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (a) (1 ) au t h o ri zes d i rect ap peal s o n l y fro m “ fi n al ju dg m en t s

,

t h a t i s t o s a y, wh ere t h e cas e i s n o l o n g er p en d i n g i n th e co urt b el o w[.] ” H o wev er, April 06, 2018“ [t ] h e co l l at eral ord er d o ct ri n e p erm i t s ap peal s fro m a s m al l cat eg o ry of d eci s i o n s t h at

are (i ) co n cl us iv e, (i i ) t h at res o l v e i m p o rt an t q u es t i o n s s ep arat e fro m t h e m eri t s

, an d

(i ii ) t h at are effect iv el y u n rev i ewab l e o n ap p eal fro m t h e fi nal j u d g m en t i n t h e

u n d e r l y i n g act i o n .” Exp ed i a

, In c. v. Ci t y o f Co lu mb us

, 3 0 5 Ga. Ap p

. 4 5 0, 4 5 2 (1 )

(6 9 9 SE2 d 6 0 0 ) (2 0 1 0 ) (p u n ct u at i o n o m it ted ). “ [T] h e co l l at eral o rd er d o ct ri n e h as

ap p li cat io n t o o n l y a v ery s m al l cl as s o f i n t erl o cu t o ry ru l i n g s ,” s e e R i ver a v.

W a s h i n g t o n

, 2 9 8 Ga. 7 7 0

, 7 7 5 (7 8 4 SE2 d 7 7 5 ) (2 0 1 6 ) (p un ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ), an d

, as

B e r r y ad m i t s

, t h i s Co urt h as n ev er en t ert ai n ed t h e d en i al o f a m o t io n t o en f o r c e

s et t l em en t as d i rect l y ap p eal ab l e u nd er th i s d o ct ri n e. Rat h er, we h av e hel d t h at s u ch

o rd ers are i n t erl o cu t o ry an d req u i re co m p l i an ce wi t h o u r i n t erl o cu t o ry ap p eal

p ro ced ures

, w h i ch in cl u d e ob t ai n i n g a cert i fi cat e of i m m ed i at e rev i ew fro m t h e t ri al

co u rt an d fi l i ng an ap p ro p ri at e ap p l i cat i o n t o t hi s Co u rt . See OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (b ).

Here, Berry ’ s cl ai m t h at sh e has al read y res o l v ed t h i s d i s p u t e wi t h St rah an can

b e effect i v el y rev i ewed o n ap p eal o n ce a fi n al ju d g m en t i s en t ered

. See Di g it al Eq u i p.

Co r p . v. Des kt o

p Di r ect , In c. , 5 1 1 U. S. 8 6 3 (1 1 4 SCt 1 9 9 2

, 1 2 8 LE2 d 8 4 2 ) (1 9 9 4 )

(u n d er t h e f

e d e r a l co l l at eral o rd er d o ct ri n e, t h e refu s al t o en fo rce a set t l em en t

ag reem en t cl ai m ed t o sh el t er a p art y fro m s u i t al t o g et h er d o es n o t s up p ly a b as i s fo r

an i m m ed i at e ap p eal

, as t h e p o t en t i al ri g h t t o n o t d efen d t h e cas e i s effect i v el y

rev i ewab l e o n fi n al ju d g m en t ); s ee al s o Ri ver a

, 2 98 Ga. at 7 7 6 -7 78 (an i n t erl o cu t o ry

o rd er reject i n g a m o t io n t o d i s m i s s b as ed o n a cl ai m o f i m m u n i t y is n o t d i rect l y

ap p eal ab l e u n der th e co ll at eral o rd er do ct ri ne). Th u s, B e rry was req u i red t o fo l l o w

t h e i nt erl o cu t o ry ap p eal pro ced u r e s o f O CGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (b ) t o ob t ai n i m m ed i at e

ap p el l at e rev iew o f t he t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er d en y i ng h er m o t i on to en fo rce s et t l em en t

.

M o r e o v e r

, co n t rary to Berry ’ s as s ert i o n

, t h e p o rt i o n o f t h e o rd er award i n g

s an ct i o n s u n d er O CGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4 i s n e i t h er d i rect l y ap p eal ab l e n o r ap p eal ab l e

t h ro u g h t h e d i s cret i o nary ap p eal p ro ced u re. It i s cl ear fro m t h e tri al co u rt ’ s o rd er t h at

t h e cas e h as been set fo r a heari n g an d

, as o f y et

, t h ere i s n o f in al ord er award i n g

OCGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4 fees i n th i s cas e. Th u s

, b ecau s e t he award o f s an ct i on s i s n o t y et

fi nal an d Berry d i d n ot fi l e an ap p l i cat i o n fo r i n terl o cu to ry rev iew u n d er OCGA § 5

-

6 -3 4 (b ), h e r a p p eal of t h is i s s u e i s p rem at ure, an d t h is Co u rt l ack s ju ri s d i ct i o n toco n si d er i t

.

Becau s e Berry fai l ed t o fo l l ow t h e req ui red ap pel l at e p ro ced ures

, h er

ap p li cat io n fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal i s h ereb y DISM ISSED fo r l ack o f ju ri s d i ct i o 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 th 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

. 04/06/2018