Martha Jackson v. Georgia Department of Transportation ( 2019 )


Menu:
  • Court of Appeals
    of the State of Georgia
    ATLANTA,____________________
    August 08, 2019
    The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
    A20A0031. MARTHA JACKSON v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF
    TRANSPORTATION.
    Martha Jackson filed a complaint against the Georgia Department of
    Transportation (“GDOT”), Reeves Construction Company, Inc. (“Reeves
    Construction”), and three unidentified individuals (“John Doe I, John Doe II, and
    John Doe III”), for injuries she sustained when she fell into a storm drain. She
    asserted a claim for negligence, and claims for negligent hiring, training, and
    supervision, against each defendant.1 The trial court granted Reeves Construction’s
    motion for summary judgment and dismissed Jackson’s case against it with prejudice.
    The court later granted GDOT’s motion to dismiss finding that GDOT had not waived
    its sovereign immunity. Jackson filed a timely notice of appeal seeking review of the
    trial court’s grant of GDOT’s motion to dismiss.
    “In a case involving multiple parties or multiple claims, a decision adjudicating
    fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of less than all the parties is not
    a final judgment.” (Punctuation omitted.) Johnson v. Hosp. Corp. of America, 
    192 Ga. App. 628
    , 629 (385 SE2d 731) (1989). Although Reeves Construction and GDOT
    were dismissed from the action, the trial court’s orders are silent as to the remaining
    unidentified individuals. Jackson’s claims against those individuals have therefore
    1
    Jackson’s amended complaint filed on February 12, 2018, does not assert any
    claims against John Doe I.
    not been adjudicated.2 “In such circumstances, there must be an express determination
    under OCGA § 9-11-54 (b) or there must be compliance with the interlocutory appeal
    requirements of OCGA § 5-6-34 (b). Where neither of these code sections [is]
    followed, the appeal is premature and must be dismissed.” (Citations and punctuation
    omitted.) Id.
    The trial court’s order in this case did not direct the entry of judgment pursuant
    to OCGA § 9-11-54 (b). Therefore, the challenged order is not a final order, and it is
    appealable only through the interlocutory appeal procedures set forth in OCGA § 5-6-
    34 (b). Shoenthal v. Shoenthal, 
    333 Ga. App. 729
    , 730 (776 SE2d 663) (2015);
    Johnson, supra, 192 Ga. App. at 629. Jackson’s failure to follow the proper appellate
    procedure deprives us of jurisdiction to consider this direct appeal, which is hereby
    DISMISSED.
    Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
    Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________
    08/08/2019
    I certify that the above is a true extract from
    the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.
    Witness my signature and the seal of said court
    hereto affixed the day and year last above written.
    , Clerk.
    2
    The “John Doe” defendants remain, at this time, unidentified. But if and when
    the plaintiffs discover their identities, under OCGA § 9-11-15 (c), they may “amend
    the original pleadings so as to change the party against whom a claim is asserted.”
    (Punctuation omitted.) Robinson v. Estate of Jester, 
    333 Ga. App. 41
    , 43 (775 SE2d
    569) (2015). Moreover, for purposes of renewing a suit under OCGA § 9-2-61, an
    “original suit is void if service was never perfected, since the filing of a complaint
    without perfecting service does not constitute a pending suit. . . . However, unless and
    until the trial court enters an order dismissing a valid action, it is merely voidable and
    not void.” Hobbs v. Arthur, 
    264 Ga. 359
    , 360 (444 SE2d 322) (1994). Here, although
    the unidentified defendants have not been served, service was perfected on GDOT
    and Reeves Construction. Accordingly, the suit is not void. And the trial court
    dismissed the complaint against GDOT and Reeves Construction; it did not dismiss
    the entire action.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: A20A0031

Filed Date: 8/21/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/21/2019