Summary
The Supreme Court of Georgia held that an order finding a party in wilful contempt for violating a discovery order, while striking the party's answer and entering default judgment as to liability under OCGA § 9-11-37(b)(2)(C), was not directly appealable as a contempt judgment. Because the order was an interlocutory discovery-sanctions order rather than a criminal or civil contempt judgment, the Court affirmed dismissal of the appeal for failure to follow interlocutory-appeal procedures.
Holdings
- An order imposing discovery sanctions under OCGA § 9-11-37(b)(2)(C) by striking an answer and entering default judgment as to liability is not directly appealable as a contempt judgment under OCGA § 5-6-34(a)(2) when it neither imposes a sanction available for criminal contempt nor attempts to coerce compliance as civil contempt would.
- Because the underlying October 3 order was an interlocutory discovery-sanctions order and not a directly appealable contempt judgment, the November 2 order dismissing the unauthorized direct appeal was itself interlocutory and could be challenged only through the interlocutory-appeal procedures of OCGA § 5-6-34(b).
Questions Presented
- Whether an order finding a wilful violation of a prior discovery order and imposing the sanctions of striking an answer and entering default judgment as to liability is directly appealable as a contempt judgment under OCGA § 5-6-34(a)(2).
- Whether the trial court's dismissal of the notice of appeal was itself directly appealable or constituted an interlocutory order requiring compliance with OCGA § 5-6-34(b).
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (15)
- Azar v. Baird, 232 Ga. 81, 82-83, 205 S.E.2d 273 (1974)(followed)
- Rolleston v. Cherry, 233 Ga. App. 295, 296, 504 S.E.2d 504 (1998)(followed)
- Hamilton Capital Group v. Equifax Credit Information Svcs., 266 Ga. App. 1, 596 S.E.2d 656 (2004)(distinguished)
- First Christ Holiness Church v. Owens Temple First Christ Holiness Church, 282 Ga. 883, 885, 655 S.E.2d 605 (2008)(followed)
- Ford v. Ford, 270 Ga. 314, 315-316, 509 S.E.2d 612 (1998)(followed)
- Alexander v. DeKalb County, 264 Ga. 362, 364, 444 S.E.2d 743 (1994)(followed)
- Carey Canada, Inc. v. Hinely, 257 Ga. 150, 151, 356 S.E.2d 202 (1987)(followed)
- Ensley v. Ensley, 239 Ga. 860, 861-862, 238 S.E.2d 920 (1977)(followed)
- City of Cumming v. Realty Dev. Corp., 268 Ga. 461, 462, 491 S.E.2d 60 (1997)(followed)
- Mathis v. Corrugated Gear, 263 Ga. 419, 422, 435 S.E.2d 209 (1993)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 15.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…