Kareem Marshall v. Sarah F. Wall, Judge

Court of Appeals
of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________
June 16, 2026

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A26O0023. KAREEM MARSHALL v. SARAH F. WALL, JUDGE.

In this dispossessory action, Kareem Marshall filed numerous motions,
including motions to dismiss and to join indispensable parties. Marshall subsequently
filed a petition for a writ of mandamus, requesting that the superior court rule on the
pending motions. On February 12, 2026, the superior court entered an order ruling
on the pending motions, setting a final hearing date, and dismissing Marshall’s
petition for mandamus. According to Marshall, he then filed a motion to recuse Judge
Sarah F. Wall, which she denied following the final hearing.
Marshall then filed this original mandamus petition,1 seeking an order
compelling Judge Wall to refrain from acting on the merits of the underlying
dispossessory case and to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction. “Generally, the
superior courts of this state have the power, in proper cases, to issue process in the
nature of mandamus, prohibition, specific performance, quo warranto, and injunction,
and hence the need to resort to the appellate courts for such relief by petition filed in
the appellate courts will be extremely rare.” Brown v. Johnson, 251 Ga. 436, 436 (306
SE2d 655) (1983); see also Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. I, Par. IV. As the Supreme
Court of Georgia recently made clear, an appellate court’s [constitutional] authority
to issue such writs “is connected only to such powers as necessary in aid of its
jurisdiction or to protect or effectuate its judgments. [That authority] does not grant

1
Marshall originally filed his petition in the Supreme Court of Georgia, which
transferred the petition to this Court. Case No. S26O1222 (May 19, 2026).
jurisdiction to [the appellate court] to issue process as an original matter wholly
unconnected to its appellate jurisdiction.” Arnold v. Alexander, 321 Ga. 330, 334(1)
(914 SE2d 311) (2025) (punctuation omitted). Thus, except in the rarest of cases, the
procedure to be followed before seeking to invoke this Court’s original mandamus
jurisdiction is to file the petition in the appropriate lower court first. Graham v.
Cavender, 252 Ga. 123, 123 (311 SE2d 832) (1984); Expedia, Inc. v. City of Columbus,
305 Ga. App. 450, 455(2)(b) (699 SE2d 600) (2010).
Here, Marshall does not appear to have filed a mandamus petition in the
superior court requesting the relief he seeks from this Court. Marshall failed to
comply with the requisite procedure for obtaining mandamus relief, and this is not one
of the extremely rare cases in which this Court will exercise original jurisdiction.
Accordingly, this petition is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________
06/16/2026
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.