After judgment was entered against them and in favor of Faye Jessup in the magistrate court, Frank Ray, Pat Ray and Fran Ray the “Rays” filed an appeal in superior court pursuant to OCGA §15-10-41 b 1. Jessup filed a voluntary dismissal of her claims against the Rays in superior court pursuant to OCGA § 9-11-41 a 1 A and then timely filed a renewal action.1 The trial court granted the Rays’s motion to dismiss Jessup’s claim and reinstated the magistrate court’s judgment against the Rays. Both parties appeal the portions of the trial court’s order adverse to their interests.2 For the reasons set for below, we reverse the judgment and remand the case to the superior court. We review a dismissal of a complaint de novo.3 So viewed, the record shows that Jessup filed a claim in magistrate court against the Rays for breach of a lease contract. The Rays answered and filed a counterclaim. After the magistrate court entered judgment for Jessup, the Rays appealed to superior court. Jessup then filed a “dismissal without prejudice” of her claims pending before the superior court and the Rays dismissed their counterclaims.
Jessup then filed this renewal action in the superior court. The Rays answered and filed a counterclaim. The Rays then moved to dismiss Jessup’s complaint. The superior court granted the motion to dismiss, finding that only the Rays, as the party who filed the complaint from magistrate court, would be able to file a renewal action in the superior court. The superior court found that Jessup’s dismissal did not dismiss the underlying case, and that the former action was not dismissed until the Rays, the appellants of the magistrate court judgment, filed their voluntary dismissal. Although the superior court did not expressly dismiss the Rays’ counterclaim in the instant action, it held that because the Rays did not renew their case, the magistrate court judgment stands reinstated, thereby implicitly dismissing the counterclaim. Both parties appeal. In Case No. A11A0985, Jessup appeals the trial court’s order granting the motion to dismiss. In Case No. A11A0986, the Rays appeal the portion of the trial court’s order reinstating the judgment of the magistrate court. We have consolidated these two cases for the purposes of appeal.
