Austin v. Querisma — Georgia Court of Appeals dismisses direct appeal for lack of jurisdiction

Case
Gwendolyn Patricia Austin v. Jonathan Querisma
Court
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Judge
Not specified
Date Decided
August 12, 2026
Docket No.
A26A0995
Topics
appellate jurisdiction; discretionary appeals; property damage; landlord-tenant
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Jonathan Querisma, a former tenant of Gwendolyn Patricia Austin, sued Austin for damage to or disposal of his personal property. After a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment for Querisma and awarded him $5,000.

Austin filed a direct appeal from that judgment.

The Court’s Holding

The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Under OCGA § 5-6-35(a)(6), an appeal in a damages action with a judgment of $10,000 or less must be initiated through an application for discretionary review.

Because Austin filed a direct appeal rather than the required discretionary application, she did not comply with a jurisdictional appellate procedure. The court therefore dismissed the appeal.

Key Takeaways

  • A $10,000-or-less judgment in a damages action generally requires an application for discretionary review in Georgia.
  • Using a direct appeal when a discretionary application is required is a jurisdictional defect.
  • The Court of Appeals did not reach the merits of the property-damage dispute.

Why It Matters

The order underscores that Georgia appellate practitioners must identify the correct appellate route before filing. A direct appeal cannot substitute for a required discretionary application, even where the appellant seeks review of a final judgment entered after a bench trial.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top