Karon Courtney v. Moody Law P.C.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia ATLANTA,____________________ September 18, 2026 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order: A27D0085. KARON COURTNEY v. MOODY LAW P.C. et al. In this civil action, pro se plaintiff Karon Courtney seeks discretionary review of the trial court’s order requiring her to post a supersedeas bond. For the reasons that follow, we lack jurisdiction. In March 2026, the trial court awarded $62,750.75 in attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14 against Courtney and in favor of respondents Vernis & Bowling of Atlanta, LLC and Mitchel Evans. Courtney sought discretionary review of that award, which this Court denied on May 5, 2026, and denied reconsideration on June 3, 2026. See Case No. A26D0457. Courtney subsequently filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court of Georgia, where review of the OCGA § 9-15-14 order remains pending in Case No. S26C1646. After Courtney filed her certiorari petition, the trial court granted the respondents’ motion for a supersedeas bond and, on July 22, 2026, entered an order directing Courtney to post a bond equal to the OCGA § 9-15-14 award. On Friday, August 21, 2026 — the final day of the 30-day statutory period to appeal the supersedeas bond order — Courtney filed an emergency motion in this Court at 11:41 p.m., requesting a brief extension until 8:00 a.m. the following day to submit her discretionary application. See Case No. A27E0017. Courtney electronically submitted her application the next night, Saturday, August 22, 2026, at 11:51 p.m.1 On August 1 Notably, despite asserting in her emergency motion that she required only a few extra hours to assemble exhibits and intended to file her application 25, 2026, we dismissed her emergency motion for an extension as moot. To be timely, a discretionary application must be filed within 30 days of entry of the order or judgment to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-35(d). This statutory deadline is jurisdictional, and we cannot accept an application for appeal not made in compliance with OCGA § 5-6-35(d). See Boyle v. State, 190 Ga. App. 734, 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989). Consequently — and pretermitting whether the bond order was directly appealable — because Courtney filed her application past the statutory deadline without an extension of time, we lack jurisdiction over this untimely application. Accordingly, this application is hereby DISMISSED, and Courtney’s “Motion to Clarify” is hereby DISMISSED as moot. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 09/18/2026 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. “immediately” thereafter, Courtney first filed a 22-page “Supplement to Motion to Vacate July 22, 2026 Order and Request for Immediate Vacatur for Lack of a Valid and Enforceable Predicate Judgment” in the trial court on August 22, 2026, before submitting her discretionary application to this Court late that night.