Mays v. Rancine-Kinchen
291 Ga. 283
| Ga. | 2012Background
- Mays, executor of the Kinchen estate, petitioned to probate decedent Gilbert Kinchen's will; Rancine-Kinchen, widow, filed a caveat.
- Probate court granted partial relief, denying two caveat counts but leaving three caveat counts concerning a non-testamentary trust referenced in the will pending.
- The court transferred trust-issue resolution to the superior court for lack of jurisdiction and reserved admitting the will to probate until those issues were resolved.
- The order did not fully adjudicate the petition to probate, but stayed further action pending the superior court’s review of trust issues.
- Appellant appealed directly from the probate order; appellee moved to dismiss asserting improper appellate procedure.
- The court held the order was interlocutory and not a final appealable judgment, thus direct appeal was inappropriate and the appeal was dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the order is a final, direct-appealable ruling | Mays contends the order denies probate in solemn form and is directly appealable | Rancine-Kinchen argues the order is interlocutory and requires 5-6-34(b) review | Interlocutory; not a final appealable order |
| Whether OCGA § 5-6-34(a)(9) permits a direct appeal from a partially sustained caveat dismissal | Mays relies on direct-appeal provision for caveat dismissals | Appellee argues rule does not apply to partially sustained dismissals lacking finality | OCGA § 5-6-34(a)(9) does not permit direct appeal from a partially sustained caveat dismissal |
| Whether the proper remedy was to pursue review under OCGA § 5-6-34(b) | Mays should have sought immediate review procedures | Procedures require a certificate of immediate review and an application for appeal | Procedural route required; failure to follow § 5-6-34(b) warranted dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- Cochran v. Levitz Furniture Co. of Eastern Region, 249 Ga. 504 (Ga. 1982) (direct appeal policy against piecemeal litigation; finality requirement)
- First Christ Holiness Church, Inc. v. Owens Temple First Christ Holiness Church, Inc., 282 Ga. 883 (Ga. 2008) (direct appeal from judgments or orders sustaining caveat dismissals; finality governs appealability)
- American Medical Security Group, Inc. v. Parker, 284 Ga. 102 (Ga. 2008) (appealability determined by substance and effect of order)
- Gray v. Springs, 224 Ga. App. 427 (Ga. App. 1997) (interlocutory nature when rulings reserve substantive issues)
- Sotter v. Stephens, 291 Ga. 79 (Ga. 2012) (judgment reserving damages calculation is interlocutory)
- Cavendar v. Evans, 218 Ga. 739 (Ga. 1963) (no final appealable order where caveat and administration letters remain to be tried)
- Wise v. Georgia State Bd. for Examination, Qualification and Registration of Architects, 244 Ga. 449 (Ga. 1979) (order sustaining dismissal of counts not final; need for certification/appellate review)
- Harley v. Holwell, 202 Ga. 724 (Ga. 1947) (when not final, review must follow proper appellate procedure)
- Geeslin v. Sheftall, 263 Ga. App. 827 (Ga. App. 2003) (appealability and procedural routes discussed)