Background
Derrick B. Jackson filed an original petition for mandamus seeking to compel a trial-court clerk to transmit the record after he says he filed a notice of appeal on July 14, 2026. Jackson also said he had filed two mandamus petitions in the trial court, but characterized those efforts as ineffective and futile.
Jackson initially filed the petition in the Supreme Court of Georgia, which transferred it to the Court of Appeals. The materials he submitted did not show when the trial-court mandamus actions were resolved, or whether they had been resolved at all.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals dismissed the original mandamus petition for lack of a basis to exercise its jurisdiction. Although Georgia appellate courts may issue extraordinary writs, that authority extends only to writs necessary to aid appellate jurisdiction or protect or effectuate appellate judgments.
Jackson had not shown that appellate mandamus was necessary for either purpose. The court explained that a litigant may not use original appellate jurisdiction to bypass the ordinary process of seeking mandamus in the trial court and then obtaining appellate review of a denial or dismissal, absent a showing that access to those channels has been unfairly blocked.
Key Takeaways
- An appellate court’s original mandamus power is limited to relief connected to its appellate jurisdiction or judgments.
- A party seeking to compel action by a trial-court clerk ordinarily must pursue mandamus in the trial court first.
- Unsupported assertions that trial-court remedies were futile do not establish a basis for original appellate mandamus relief.
Why It Matters
The order underscores that original extraordinary-writ petitions in Georgia appellate courts are exceptional, not a substitute for completing available trial-court proceedings. Parties seeking to enforce record-transmission obligations should document the status and disposition of any trial-court mandamus proceedings before requesting appellate intervention.