W. Harrison Merrill and Vanguard Management Corporation (“Merrill & Vanguard”) appeal from the trial court’s judgment in their favor in a proceeding brought by Eiberger to confirm a foreclosure sale. Although the trial court refused to confirm the sale of the property because the property did not bring its true market value, Merrill and Vanguard appeal because they assert that certain rulings on other issues raised in their motion to dismiss may prejudice their litigation posture in other cases. Nevertheless, appellants do not seek reversal of the trial court’s judgment. Held:
This court serves to correct errors of the trial court. It is a well established principle, however, that for errors to require reversal they must be harmful. See OCGA § 9-11-61;
Baker v. Baker,
It is not our function to provide advisory opinions on other issues which potentially may arise in other litigation, or to assure that all errors are corrected regardless of the lack of prejudice to the parties. See
Board of Trustees &c. v. Kenworthy,
As no party to this appeal seeks reversal of the judgment of the trial court, the issues presented are moot. “A moot case is one which seeks to determine an abstract question which does not arise upon
existing
facts or rights. . . . This court will upon its own motion dismiss an appeal where it affirmatively appears that a decision would be of no benefit to the complaining party. The fact that the appellants might possibly derive some future benefit from a favorable adjudication on an abstract question will not require this court to retain and decide the case.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.)
Chastain v.
Appeal dismissed.