Spurlock v. Department of Human Resources
Supreme Court of Georgia
1ConcurrenceNahmias, Justice
I join Divisions 1 and 3 of the majority opinion, but not Division 2, because no court of competent jurisdiction has ever granted appellant Scott Spurlock’s discretionary application to appeal, as is required by OCGA § 5-6-35 (f). The Court of Appeals purported to grant the application, but that was before it correctly recognized that it had no jurisdiction over this case and transferred the granted appeal to this Court. Appellee Lois Spurlock then filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that this Court had not granted the application and that it was by then untimely, but the Court denied the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Ex Parte McCardleSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Webster v. FallSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Heard v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2001
- State v. MurraySupreme Court of Georgia · 2009
- Albany Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. HendersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.