Court Opinion

ID: 9539521
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:05:29.847884+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:58:55.260511
License: Public Domain

*143Pope, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. The majority cites two grounds in support of its reversal of the superior court’s confirmation of the subject foreclosure sale — viz., the lack of evidence that the sale was properly advertised pursuant to OCGA § 44-14-162, and the lack of evidence that appellant was properly notified of the sale pursuant to OCGA § 44-14-162.1. However, the record discloses that neither of these grounds was raised by appellant in the court below; thus, neither ground can form the basis for a reversal in this court. Indeed, the testimony given by appellant himself would support a finding that appellee had complied with both Code sections. See T. 46-51. In my view, the superior court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are supported by the evidence of record and adequately explain the decision rendered. Therefore, I would affirm the judgment of the superior court.
I am authorized to state that Presiding Judge Deen and Judge Sognier join in this dissent.