Georgia Dept. of Human Resources v. Patillo
| Decision Date | 22 January 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. A89A1603,A89A1603 |
| Parties | GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES v. PATILLO. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., H. Perry Michael, Executive Asst. Atty. Gen., Stephanie B. Manis, Deputy Atty. Gen., William C. Joy, Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen., William M. Droze, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.
Daniel J. Craig, Augusta, for appellee.
Georgia Department of Human Resources appeals from the order of the trial court dismissing its appeal for failure to obtain the timely filing of a trial transcript.
Young v. Climatrol, etc., Corp., 237 Ga. 53, 55, 226 S.E.2d 737 (1976); Glen Restaurants v. Bldg. 5 Assoc., 189 Ga.App. 327(2), 375 S.E.2d 492 (1988).
Both sides have supplied numerous record and legal citations regarding what facts constitute an unreasonable and inexcusable delay, but the crucial point is that the trial court must make such findings before we may determine whether it abused its discretion. See Baker v. Southern R. Co., 192 Ga.App. 444, 445, 385 S.E.2d 125 (1989); City of College Park v. Ga. Power Co., 188 Ga.App. 223, 224, 372 S.E.2d 493 (1988). The final order merely granted the motion to dismiss, and the court did not orally state any findings at the conclusion of the hearing. The failure to ascertain the reasonableness and excusableness of the delay mandates a reversal of the order and a remand with instruction that findings be made on these issues. Speir v. Nicholson, 193 Ga.App. 444, 388 S.E.2d 42 (1989). See White v. Olderman Realty, etc., Co., 163 Ga.App. 57, 58, 293 S.E.2d 726 (1982).
Judgment reversed and case remanded with instruction.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Grant v. Grant
...make findings on these issues before we may determine whether its discretion was abused.’ ” (quoting Ga. Dep't of Human Res. v. Patillo, 194 Ga.App. 279, 279, 390 S.E.2d 431 (1990))); see also Wood v. Notte, 238 Ga.App. 748, 749(1), 519 S.E.2d 923 (1999) (same); Crenshaw, 202 Ga.App. at 611......
-
Fulton Cnty. Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Tech. Square, LLC
...so that we know that the court considered the correct factors in exercising its discretion."); Ga. Dept. of Human Resources v. Patillo , 194 Ga. App. 279, 279, (390 S.E.2d 431) (1990) (reversing the judgment and remanding the case for requisite findings, because despite the parties’ "numero......
-
Hewett v. Raytheon Aircraft Co.
...of these cases is correct — compare Wood v. Notte, 238 Ga.App. 748, 519 S.E.2d 923 (1999), and Ga. Dept. of Human Resources v. Patillo, 194 Ga.App. 279, 390 S.E.2d 431 (1990) — Cooper and Lee are distinguishable from the situation here. Neither case addressed whether this Court may impose a......
-
Crenshaw v. Georgia Underwriting Ass'n, s. A91A1948
...to whether under the circumstances the delay was unreasonable and, if so, whether it was inexcusable. Georgia Dept. of Human Resources v. Patillo, 194 Ga.App. 279, 390 S.E.2d 431 (1990). The trial court simply denied the motion to dismiss without elaboration. In determining whether the dela......