Georgia Court of Appeals, 2024

Neva Muhlenberg v. Dale Muhlenberg

Neva Muhlenberg v. Dale Muhlenberg
Georgia Court of Appeals · Decided September 5, 2024

Neva Muhlenberg v. Dale Muhlenberg

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia ATLANTA,____________________ September 05, 2024 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order: A25D0045. NEVA MUHLENBERG v. DALE MUHLENBERG In this domestic relations case, Neva Muhlenberg timely requested an extension of time to file her application for discretionary review and we granted her leave to file until August 26, 2024. See Case No. A25E0005. On August 27, 2024, Neva filed her application for discretionary review.

We lack jurisdiction because the application is untimely. Ordinarily, a discretionary application must be filed within 30 days of the entry of the order to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-35 (d); Hill v. State, 204 Ga. App. 582, 583 (420 SE2d 393) (1992). However, this Court may, in its discretion, extend this deadline a single time.

See OCGA § 5-6-39; Court of Appeals Rule 16 (c). The requirements of OCGA § 5-6-35 are jurisdictional, and this Court cannot accept an application for appeal not made in compliance therewith. Boyle v. State, 190 Ga. App. 734, 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989). Neva was required to file her application by August 26, 2024. Her failure to do so divests this Court of jurisdiction to consider her application.

On August 29, 2024, Neva requested a 24-hour extension of time to file her application for discretionary review. Pretermitting whether a motion to extend a pre- existing extension of time is permissible under Court of Appeals Rule 16 (c) (providing “[o]nly one extension of time will be granted”), Neva did not file her motion before the expiration of her previously extended deadline. Therefore, her motion is also untimely. See OCGA § 5-6-39 (d)(“Any application to any court, justice, or judge for an extension of time must be made before the expiration of the period for filing as originally prescribed or as extended by a permissible previous order.”); Court of Appeals Rule 16 (c). Accordingly, Neva’s motion for a 24-hour extension is DENIED.

Neva’s failure to file her application for discretionary review by the extended deadline deprives this Court of jurisdiction to consider her application, which is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 09/05/2024 I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.