Appellee brought this action against appellants seeking recovery of the principal amount due on account plus interest and attorney fees. Appellants answered, denying any indebtedness to appellee, and counterclaimed for damages for breach of contract and warranties. Appellee subsequently amended its complaint to add a prayer for damages for abusive litigation pursuant to
Yost v. Torok,
Appellee has moved to dismiss this appeal based upon appellants’ failure to make application for discretionary appeal, the judgment herein being less than $2,500. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (6). Although the grant of a motion for summary judgment is in general directly appealable, where the amount of the judgment is $2,500 or less, an application for discretionary appeal is required.
Jarrett v. Ford Motor Credit Co.,
Likewise, the dismissal of appellants’ counterclaim provides no basis for a direct appeal. The ruling is not on the merits and thus is not tantamount to the grant of summary judgment so as to be directly appealable.
Denney v. Shield Ins. Co.,
The remaining rulings in the trial court’s order clearly deal with discovery matters and, thus, are also interlocutory and provide no basis for a direct appeal. See, e.g.,
American Express Co. v. Yondorf,
It follows from the foregoing that the record provides no basis for *150 a direct appeal in this case. Accordingly, appellee’s motion to dismiss is meritorious and we are compelled to grant it. Appellee’s motion for damages for frivolous appeal pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-6 is denied.
Appeal dismissed.
