You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Boaz Yehiel Badichi v. Albion Trading Inc.

Citation: Not availableDocket: A16D0402

Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia; August 25, 2016; Georgia; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

Boaz Yehiel Badichi filed a request for discretionary review regarding the trial court's decision to grant partial summary judgment in favor of Albion Trading, Inc. and related entities in a case concerning equitable partition and accounting. The application was initially transferred to the Supreme Court, which later returned it to the Court of Appeals, stating it lacked jurisdiction. The appellees' motion for reconsideration to return the appeal to the Court of Appeals was denied as moot. The Court determined that the grant of partial summary judgment is subject to direct appeal under OCGA § 9-11-56(h) and OCGA § 5-6-35(j). Consequently, the application for discretionary review was granted, allowing the defendants ten days to file a notice of appeal with the superior court. The court clerk was instructed to include this order in the appellate record.

Legal Issues Addressed

Direct Appeal of Partial Summary Judgment

Application: The court confirmed that a partial summary judgment can be directly appealed under specific statutory provisions.

Reasoning: The Court determined that the grant of partial summary judgment is subject to direct appeal under OCGA § 9-11-56(h) and OCGA § 5-6-35(j).

Jurisdiction of Appellate Courts

Application: The Supreme Court determined it lacked jurisdiction over the matter and returned the application to the Court of Appeals.

Reasoning: The application was initially transferred to the Supreme Court, which later returned it to the Court of Appeals, stating it lacked jurisdiction.

Procedure for Discretionary Review

Application: The Court granted the application for discretionary review and provided a specific timeframe for filing a notice of appeal.

Reasoning: Consequently, the application for discretionary review was granted, allowing the defendants ten days to file a notice of appeal with the superior court.