Rothenberg v. Invesco International Corp.
Rothenberg v. Invesco International Corp.
Opinion of the Court
The appellant, Ms. Rothenberg, obtained a judgment in a federal district court against defendant below, Davis, in the amount of $40,381.66. Davis did not file a supersedeas bond but appealed the adverse verdict to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Pending the appeal, Ms. Rothenberg brought garnishment proceedings against Davis’ employer, Invesco International Corp. Invesco filed an answer admitting that Davis was its employee
We note that in a brief in support of the motion for reconsideration, Ms. Rothenberg requested that the stay be lifted and that the case proceed on its merits or alternatively that Davis be required to post a supersedeas bond. We see in this comment a concession, and properly so, that this case is still pending below. Because the record shows that there are issues remaining for disposition in the trial court, the order of the trial court granting the stay did not obviate (in fact it created) the necessity for appellant Rothenberg to obtain a certificate of immediate review within ten days of the grant of the stay as required by Code Ann. § 6-701 (a)2. Furthermore, in the absence of such a request, the right to such a review has not been granted by this court.
The record failing to show that a final judgment has been entered or that a certificate of immediate review granted, this appeal is premature and must be dismissed. Mathews v. Fidelcor Mtg. Corp., 144 Ga. App. 140 (240 SE2d 758).
Appeal dismissed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.