Wilson v. McQueen, 162 S.E.2d 313 (Ga. 1968). · Go Syfert
Wilson v. McQueen, 162 S.E.2d 313 (Ga. 1968). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
79 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 7 distinct courts.
Treatment trajectory · 1968 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1968 1997 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Austin v. Carter
Ga. · 1982 · confidence medium
In Wilson v. McQueen, 224 Ga. 420, 421 ( 162 SE2d 313 ) (1968), this court held: “From [Code Ann. § 6-803 (a)] it is manifest that the General Assembly intended that a notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after entry of the appealable judgment complained of, except where there is filed (1) a motion for new trial, (2) a motion in arrest of judgment, or (3) a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Wilson v. COITE SOMERS COMPANY
Ga. Ct. App. · 1976 · confidence medium
Code Ann. § 6-809 (b) (2). ".. ,[I]t is manifest that the General Assembly intended that a notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after entry of the appealable judgment complained of, except where there is filed (1) a motion for new trial, (2) a motion in arrest of judgment, or (3) a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.” Wilson v. McQueen, 224 Ga. 420, 421 ( 162 SE2d 313 ).
discussed Cited "see" Hardy v. Georgia Power Co. (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 1979 · signal: see · confidence high
See in this regard Wilson v. McQueen, 224 Ga. 420 ( 162 SE2d 313 ).
cited Cited "see" W. T. A. Associates, Inc. v. Beamon
Ga. Ct. App. · 1977 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wilson v. McQueen, 224 Ga. 420 , supra, overruling McQueen v. Wilson, 117 Ga. App. 488 , supra, and the dissenting opinion in the latter case beginning on p. 493.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Horton v. Horton (2×)
Ga. · 1975 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Wilson v. McQueen, 224 Ga. 420 ( 162 SE2d 313 ); Adamson v. Adamson, 226 Ga. 719 ( 177 SE2d 241 ).
examined Cited "see, e.g." Bernath Barrel & Drum Co. v. Ostrum Boiler Service, Inc. (4×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 1974 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Wilson v. McQueen, 224 Ga. 420 ( 162 SE2d 313 ); Williams v. Keebler, 222 Ga. 437 ( 150 SE2d 674 ); George v. Lee, 118 Ga. App. 302 (1) ( 163 SE2d 262 ).” In the case of Young v. Young, 227 Ga. 570 ( 181 SE2d 867 ) there was an appeal from an award of temporary alimony including attorney fees to a wife in a divorce action, as well as from the judgment of the court refusing to vacate and reconsider this action.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Young v. Young (2×)
Ga. · 1971 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Wilson v. McQueen, 224 Ga. 420 ( 162 SE2d 313 ); Adamson v. Adamson, 226 Ga. 719 ( 177 SE2d 241 ). (a) Nor can such enumerations of error be reviewed based upon the notice of appeal from the original judgment granting temporary alimony since all such enumerations of error relate to actions of the trial court taken after the appealable judgment was rendered (see Graham v. Haley, 224 Ga. 498 (4) ( 162 SE2d 346 )), and such actions do not relate to one of the exceptions provided by law.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Bullington (2×)
Ga. · 1971 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Wilson v. McQueen, 224 Ga. 420 ( 162 SE2d 313 ), as to necessity of a timely notice of appeal from the final judgment in the case, and the circumstances for extending such time.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Adamson v. Adamson (2×)
Ga. · 1970 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Wilson v. McQueen, 224 Ga. 420 ( 162 SE2d 313 ); Williams v. Keebler, 222 Ga. 437 ( 150 SE2d 674 ); George v. Lee, 118 Ga. App. 302 (1) ( 163 SE2d 262 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
WILSON Et Al.
v.
McQUEEN
24680.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Jun 20, 1968.
162 S.E.2d 313
LeRoy C. Hobbs, Ben J. Camp, for appellants., Samuel D. Hewlett, Jr., L. Paul Cobb, Jr., Florence Hewlett Bendy, for appellee.
Grice.
Cited by 39 opinions  |  Published
Grice, Justice.

We determine here whether an order superseding a prior judgment, which sustained general demurrers to a petition, tolls the time within which to appeal from the prior judgment.

The Court of Appeals (one Judge dissenting) held that it did, based upon the facts which follow.

Suit was brought in the Civil Court of Fulton County by Butterfly McQueen against Clarence T. Wilson and Stone Mountain Plantation, Inc.

On June 27, 1967, the trial court entered a judgment sustaining the defendants’ general demurrers to the plaintiff’s petition and dismissing it. On June 30 the defendant filed a motion for reconsideration, and on that same date the trial court entered an order which recited “Let this order be a supersedeas to the [judgment] entered June 27 . . . until further order. . .” On July 26, the trial court entered an order which recited that upon reconsideration the general demurrers were sustained and the petition was dismissed. On August 25, the plaintiff filed notice of. appeal from the judgment of June 27 and also from the judgment of July 26.

[*421] The defendants moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the notice of appeal was not timely, being filed more than 30 days after entry of a final and appealable order. This motion was denied by the Court of Appeals (117 Ga. App. 488 (161 SE2d 63)), and we granted the defendants’ application for certiorari.

From these facts the following issue of law is presented: Where a final and appealable judgment on demurrers is entered but is ordered to be superseded until further order and a second judgment is subsequently entered, is a notice of appeal filed more than 30 days after the original judgment timely?

In our view the clear answer to this is embodied in Section 5 of. the Appellate Practice Act (Ga. L. 1965', pp. 18, 21, as amended; Code Ann. § 6-803), which provides in material part as follows: “A notice of appeal shall be filed within 30 days after entry of the appealable decision or judgment complained of . . . but when a motion for new trial, or a motion in arrest of judgment, or a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict has been filed, the notice shall be filed within 30 days after the entry of the order granting, overruling, or otherwise finally disposing of the motion.”

From this section of the Act it is manifest that the General Assembly intended that a notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after entry of the appealable judgment complained of, except where there is filed (1) a motion for new trial, (2) a motion in arrest of judgment, or (3) a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. A supersedeas is thus not among those exceptions which automatically extend the filing date for notices of appeal. See Williams v. Keebler, 222 Ga. 437 (150 SE2d 674); Bailey v. State, 224 Ga. 48 (159 SE2d 286).

Here, it is significant that the original judgment was not set aside or vacated, but was only superseded. We cannot agree that the supersedeas proceeding was in effect a motion for new trial, so as to comprise one of the three exceptions in Section 5 of the Appellate Practice Act, supra.

For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the judgment of the Court of Appeals is erroneous.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.