Judgment AFFIRMED, as evidence supported monthly child support awarded to appellee; appellant’s argument that his supplemental security income (SSI) was his sole income and, thus, he could not be liable for any amount of child support, rejected, because trial court granted appellant’s motion to exclude SSI benefits from its child support calculations;  appellant’s argument that trial court erred by imputing other income to him rejected, because trial court made all requisite findings; although appellee admitted that appellant was not willingly unemployed, trial court presumably resolved conflicting evidence properly in absence of transcript; appellant’s argument that his driving ability was insufficient to show his capability to find gainful employment, rejected, because trial court had opportunity to assess appellant and because substantial, unsupervised visitation with his son granted to appellant was inconsistent with his claim of severe disability, rendering him incapable of part-time employment.

Larizza v. Larizza, S09F1836 (02/01/2010), 10 FCDR 228.

From:  Fulton County Daily Report, 2/12/2010)

Final judgment and decree of divorce AFFIRMED; trial court did not abuse its discretion in adopting guardian ad litem’s (“GAL”) report and recommendation that father be granted primary physical custody of parties’ three children, despite father’s out-of-state move; record relied mother’s contention that trial court did not consider effects of relocation or children’s best interest; record showed that consideration of father’s previous move in regard to children’s welfare and its pragmatic consequences were pivotal to trial court’s custody determines and plan to implement visitation; trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering mother to pay 1/2 of cost of transportation for children to travel back and forth to Denver when father voluntarily moved out of state, since trial court found parties’ gross monthly incomes were approximately equivalent and father was primary physical custodian;  mother did not dispute father’s assertion that he no longer lives in Denver or that he primarily resides in Atlanta and mother conceded that children have remained with her and that issue of travel to Denver for visitation was non extant;  trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding GAL fees without application for fees or hearing, since USCR 24.9 (8) (g) provides that hearing may be waived, GAL submitted bill for services rendered up until day prior to trial and mother did not request hearing on matter.

Salmon-Davis v. Davis, S09F1609 (02/01/2010), 10 FCDR 227

From:  Fulton County Daily Report, 2/12/2010.

Judgment granting father’s motion to enforce settlement agreement pertaining to child custody and visitation and awarding him primary physical custody of his two children, AFFIRMED; absent transcript, trial court presumably did not err in rejecting mother’s claims that she did not assent to settlement’s terms and lacked capacity to contract at time in question due to medical condition;  Court had jurisdiction over direct appeal of matter, since relevant legal action for jurisdictional purposes was father’s motion to enforce settlement agreement, which he filed after 2007 amendment to OCGA § 5-6-34 providing that all judgments or orders in child custody cases are directly appealable – and not divorce complaint, which was filed prior to amendment.

Martinez v. Martinez, A10A0248 (11/24/09), 09 FCDR 3955

From:  Fulton County Daily Report, 12/18/2009.

Termination of mother’s parental rights to her three children, AFFIRMED, as evidence supported it; mother had history of displaying bizarre, paranoid behavior, she stopped taking her prescribed medication and skipped her mental health appointments, she failed to clean her home, she provided no evidence of employment or ability to pay monthly living expenses, she failed to pay child support and she failed to maintain bond with her children.

In the Interest of S.P., A09A15 (11/12/09)

From:  Fulton County Daily Report  (12/4/ 2009)

Termination of father’s parental rights, AFFIRMED, as evidence supported it; father never contacted children nor DFACS during his 5-year incarceration, he failed to maintain or establish meaningful bond with children, essentially abandoning them and, even before his incarceration, he only saw children sporadically, despite his purported concern that mother abused drugs; continued deprivation was likely to cause harm due to children’s emotional and psychological frailty and termination was in children’s best interest.

In the Interest of T.L.H. and O.D.H., A09A1177

From:  Fulton County Daily Report, 12/4/2009

Deprivation order AFFIRMED as evidence supported it; mother repeatedly subjected children to unwarranted and unnecessary forensic interviews and medical exams in her unsuccessful attempts to substantiate sexual abuse by their father.

In the Interest of S.K. and A.K., A09A1357 (11/13/09)

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (12/4/2009)

GA orders granting sole custody of son to mother and sole custody of daughter to father, AFFIRMED;  mother’s contention that juvenile court erred in denying motion for reunification was meritless, since juvenile court sustained motion for reunification; juvenile court was authorized to find material change in circumstances because mother had suffered decline in mental health; juvenile court did not abuse discretion by determining that it was in daugher’s best interest to live with father, despite father’s acts of family violence; juvenile court did not err in denying mother’s discovery requests as untimely, because re-trial order required all discovery to be filed by 30 days after order and mother waited until almost nie moths later to file motion to compel discovery.

In the Interest of T.S. & L.S., A09A1294 (11/05/09)

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (12/4/2009)

Judgment AFFIRMED in parties’ divorce case; trial court correctly avoided any assumption against mother’s relocation to Pennsylvania and did not abuse its discretion in awarding priomary physical custody of parties’ young child to father; trial court had authority to discount any evidence of grandparents’ previous voluntary support of their grandchild, given parties’ substantial incomes.

Haskell v. Haskell, S09F1100 (11/02/09).

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (11/11/2009)

Termination of mother and father’s parental rights and award of custody to DHR, AFFIRMED, juvenile court did not lack jurisdiction to proceed with dispostional hearing, even though parents executed voluntary surrender in favor of maternal great-grandparents on September 15, 2008, since juvenile court’s order, wich was not filed until September 17, 2008, clearly stated that it was nunc pro tunc to September 3, 2008, date of termination hearing; juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in treating great-grandparents’ ages as dispositive factor in dispositional hearing, because juvenile’s court’s duty to consider best interest of child gives court discretion to consider many factors and evidence showed that DHR recommended foster family for child’s long-term placement and child had developed attchements to family.

In the Interest of D.C.H., A09A1557 (11/06/09)

From:  Fulton County Daily Report, 12/4/2009

Order finding child deprived AFFIRMED as evidence supported it; evidence showed that then 5-month-old infant was sexually abused while she was solely in care of her mother and father and mother failed to protect infant from injury.

IN THE INTEREST OF K.L., (a09a1449 (10/21/09)

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (11/06/2009)