Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
COLE v. COLE.
James Cole was held in wilful contempt of court for his failure to perform certain affirmative actions the trial court required of him in a May 1996 order. Cole challenges the contempt holding on the basis that it was “legally impossible” for him to comply with the trial court's May 1996 ruling. However, Cole did not file an appeal from the May 1996 order; his motion for reconsideration in the trial court was untimely; and Cole has not utilized any of the methods under OCGA § 9-11-60 to challenge the May 1996 order. Under these circumstances, Cole cannot challenge the validity of the May 1996 order in the subsequent contempt proceeding.1
Judgment affirmed.
FOOTNOTES
1. This holding renders it unnecessary for us to address the second question for which Cole's application for discretionary appeal was granted.
HUNSTEIN, Justice.
All the Justices concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. S97A1427.
Decided: September 22, 1997
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)