Summary
Judgment affirmed. Quillian, C. J., and McMurray, P. J., concur.
Summary
Judgment affirmed. Quillian, C. J., and McMurray, P. J., concur.
Text
Appellant brings this appeal from the entry of a dispossessory warrant against him by the State Court of DeKalb County. Appellant enumerates as error the trial court's failure to make findings of fact and conclusions of law in accordance with the Civil Practice Act, Code Ann. 81A-152 (a). Appellant also enumerates as error the trial court's failure "to find sufficient facts to support a striking of [his] answer and to the granting of a judgment by default as required by [Code Ann. 81A-152]."
The record shows that appellant filed an answer and counterclaim in response to appellee's petition for a dispossessory warrant. Therefore, appellant was entitled to a trial of the issues "in accordance with procedure prescribed for civil actions in courts of record." Code Ann. 61-303. The State Court of DeKalb County is a court of record and its practice and procedure is controlled by the Civil Practice Act. Electro-Kinetics Corp. v. Wilson,
Appellee asserts in his brief on appeal that the trial court struck appellant's defensive pleadings on appellee's motion made pursuant to Code Ann. 24-3341, which provides: "When a case is sounded for trial, the parties shall immediately announce ready, or move to continue; if three minutes should elapse before the announcement or motion to continue, the plaintiff's case will be dismissed, or the defendant's answer stricken." [1] The motion was apparently made orally to the trial court [2] after appellant failed to respond to the call of the case for trial and after appellant had requested a continuance at each of the two previous calls of the case for trial. While the record in this case does not disclose that appellant's pleadings have been stricken, appellant admits on appeal that the judgment entered against him was by default. Under this circumstance, compliance with Code Ann. 81A-152 is not required. Galanti v. Emerald City Records,
Jimmy Smith, pro se.
Notes:
1. This rule of the superior courts is also applicable to the State Court of DeKalb County. Code Ann. 24-2107a.
2. Such a motion need not be reduced to writing. Easterling v. Easterling,
Sponsored links