Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

240 Ga. App. 684

524 S.E.2d 758

99 FultonCountyD.Rep. 4171

Wright v. Barnes

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided November 4, 1999

Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1999-11-04

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently December 2017

6 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Absent a waiver, a movant for new trial is entitled to a hearing on the motion in the trial court before a ruling is made thereon; and if the movant's right to such a hearing has been denied, we must return the case to the trial court for a hearing and disposition of the motion before the merits of the remaining claims of error are addressed.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including In the Interest of M. I., a Child

Relies on Peyton v. Peyton · Shockley v. State · Foster v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1999-11-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Andrews, Presiding Judge.

¶1 Melanie Wright appeals from the denial of her motion for new trial after a jury awarded her zero damages on her claims for medical expenses and pain and suffering following an automobile accident. *685 Among her enumerations of error is the claim that the trial court erred in entering an order denying her motion for new trial without holding a hearing on that motion. The record shows that Wright filed a timely motion for new trial on August 28, 1994. There is a rule nisi setting the motion down for hearing on October 22, 1998. On October 13, 1998, before holding the hearing, the trial court denied the motion for new trial.

Decided November 4, 1999. Dozier, Lee, Graham & Sikes, Lester Z. Dozier, Jr., James V. Pleasants, for appellant. Whelchel, Brown, Readdick & Bumgartner, Brenda K. Fleocer, for appellee.

¶2 Our case law holds that a movant on a motion for new trial is entitled to a hearing on that motion. Gantt v. Sweatman, 162 Ga. App. 738 (293 SE2d 359) (1982), citing Foster v. State, 230 Ga. 870 (199 SE2d 790) (1973) and Shockley v. State, 230 Ga. 869 (199 SE2d 791) (1973). Because there is nothing in the record showing that Wright waived or abandoned her right to a hearing, she was entitled to have the motion heard before the trial court ruled on it. See Peyton v. Peyton, 236 Ga. 119 (223 SE2d 96) (1976). Therefore, we are remanding this case to the trial court for a hearing on Wright’s motion for new trial.

¶3 In light of our holding above, we do not address the remaining enumerations of error.

¶4 Judgment reversed and case remanded with direction.

McMurray, P. J., and Ruffin, J., concur.
/240/gaapp/684 · .json · Public domain