“Nunc pro tunc” means “now for then.” A Georgia judge uses it to give an order today the legal effect of an earlier date, and it works only when something actually happened on that earlier date.
What It Is For
In Norman v. Ault, 287 Ga. 324 (2010), the Georgia Supreme Court described the proper use as “recording that which had been decreed but not recorded or correctly recording that which had been decreed but misrecorded,” and said that “every court has the inherent power – and it is the court’s duty – to correct its own records to make them speak the truth.”
A jury returned its verdict in April 2009. The trial court did not sign the final divorce decree until October, then entered it nunc pro tunc to April 7. The Supreme Court upheld it, because the jury had returned a verdict and the case was ripe for judgment on the earlier date. Your divorce can be dated to the day the decision was actually made rather than the day the paperwork was finished.
What It Is Not For
Supplying a decision the judge had not yet made. In Tate v. Tate, 340 Ga. App. 361 (2017), a trial court entered a final contempt order in January and backdated it to the previous August. The Court of Appeals reversed: “The trial court did not rule upon the issues contained in the final order until January 15, 2016. Therefore, it may not deem such ruling as having been in effect since the previous August.”
It Will Not Save a Late Appeal
Backdating does not restart the appeal clock. A notice of appeal from an order entered December 1 was not timely “regardless of the fact that it was entered nunc pro tunc” to an earlier day. Count the deadline from actual entry.
Contact Us
This post is a quick overview of the law and is not intended as legal advice. Please feel free to contact our office for a consultation if you have questions about this or any other legal aspects regarding your case!