Percival Mulbah v. Kl Capital, LLC
Docket A26D0401
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- Georgia
- Court
- Court of Appeals of Georgia
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Civil
- Disposition
- Dismissed
- Docket
- A26D0401
Application for discretionary review to the Court of Appeals following dismissal by the superior court of a petition for review of a dispossessory judgment
Summary
The Court of Appeals dismissed the Mulbahs' application for discretionary review in a dispossessory (eviction) case because it was untimely. After the magistrate ruled for defendant KL Capital, LLC, the Mulbahs sought review in superior court; that court dismissed their petition on 2026-02-12 and denied reconsideration on 2026-03-04. The Mulbahs filed for discretionary review on 2026-03-09, but Georgia law requires such appeals in dispossessory actions to be filed within seven days of the judgment, and a reconsideration motion does not extend that deadline. Because timeliness is jurisdictional, the court dismissed the application.
Issues Decided
- Whether the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction over a discretionary application filed more than seven days after the superior court's dismissal of a petition for review in a dispossessory action
- Whether filing a motion for reconsideration tolls the seven-day deadline for filing a discretionary application in a dispossessory action
Court's Reasoning
Georgia law requires appeals in dispossessory actions, including discretionary applications, to be filed within seven days of the judgment. Precedent establishes that a motion for reconsideration does not toll that seven-day filing period and that an order denying reconsideration is not separately appealable. Because the Mulbahs filed their application 25 days after the superior court's dismissal and after a reconsideration motion that did not extend the deadline, the Court lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the application.
Authorities Cited
- OCGA § 44-7-56(b)(1)
- Stubbs v. Local Homes, LLC375 Ga. App. 513 (915 SE2d 91) (2025)
- Harris v. State278 Ga. 280 (600 SE2d 592) (2004)
Parties
- Appellant
- Percival Mulbah
- Appellant
- Jane Mulbah
- Appellee
- KL Capital, LLC
- Judge
- Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
Key Dates
- Superior court dismissal of petition for review
- 2026-02-12
- Superior court denial of motion for reconsideration
- 2026-03-04
- Application for discretionary review filed
- 2026-03-09
- Court of Appeals order date
- 2026-04-02
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consult an attorney promptly
Talk with a lawyer experienced in dispossessory appeals to explore whether any procedural mistakes can be corrected or whether alternative relief in the trial courts is available.
- 2
Review deadlines and filings
Confirm the exact dates of the superior court order and any filings to ensure the timeliness calculation was correct and to determine if any clerical or filing errors occurred.
- 3
Consider restarting in trial court if available
If substantive defenses or procedural defects remain, consider seeking relief in the magistrate or superior court where permissible, subject to statutory time limits.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The Court of Appeals dismissed the Mulbahs' application for discretionary review as untimely because it was filed more than seven days after the superior court's dismissal.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The plaintiffs/appellants Percival and Jane Mulbah are affected because their request for further review was dismissed; defendant KL Capital, LLC remains the prevailing party in the dispossessory matter.
- Why wasn't the reconsideration motion considered to extend the deadline?
- Under Georgia law and precedent, a motion for reconsideration does not toll the seven-day deadline for filing a discretionary application in dispossessory cases, so the filing deadline remained jurisdictional and expired.
- Can this decision be appealed?
- Because the Court of Appeals dismissed the application for lack of jurisdiction based on an untimely filing, there is generally no further appeal from this administrative dismissal, though the Mulbahs could consult counsel about any narrow procedural remedies or whether any timely remedy remains.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
Court of Appeals
of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA,____________________
April 02, 2026
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
A26D0401. PERCIVAL MULBAH et al v. KL CAPITAL, LLC.
In this dispossessory action, the magistrate court entered judgment in favor of
defendant KL Capital, LLC, and plaintiffs Percival Mulbah and Jane Mulbah filed a
petition for review in superior court. On February 12, 2026, the superior court entered
an order dismissing the petition for review. The Mulbahs filed a motion for
reconsideration, which the superior court denied on March 4, 2026. The Mulbahs
then filed the instant application for discretionary review on March 9, 2026. We lack
jurisdiction.
Appeals in dispossessory actions, including applications for discretionary
review, must be filed within seven days of the date the judgment was entered. See
OCGA § 44-7-56(b)(1); Stubbs v. Local Homes, LLC, 375 Ga. App. 513, 516–17 (915
SE2d 91) (2025); Radio Sandy Springs v. Allen Road Joint Venture, 311 Ga. App. 334,
335–36 (715 SE2d 752) (2011). Further, an order denying a motion for reconsideration
is not appealable in its own right, Bell v. Cohran, 244 Ga. App. 510, 511 (536 SE2d 187)
(2000), and a motion for reconsideration does not toll the time for filing an application
to appeal. Harris v. State, 278 Ga. 280, 282 n.3 (600 SE2d 592) (2004). Thus, the
instant discretionary application is untimely, because it was filed 25 days after the
superior court’s order dismissing the petition for review, and because the motion for
reconsideration did not toll the time for filing the application.
The deadlines for filing applications for discretionary review are jurisdictional,
and this Court cannot accept an application not made in compliance with the
applicable deadline. See Boyle v. State, 190 Ga. App. 734, 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989).
Accordingly, the instant application is hereby DISMISSED.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________
04/02/2026
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.