New Georgia Family Law New Opinions, Opportunities, Resources
  • New GA Court Opinions
  • GA CLE
  • Resources - Books
  • Resources - More
  • Resources - Government
  • About
  • Contact

GA Child Custody, Child Cupport, Modificaiton, Visitation Rights, Jurisdiction, Dismissal

Posted Jul.19, 2011 by Cynthia J. Remboldt, Esq., under Child Support, Custody, Jurisdiction, Modification, Visitation

 Child Cupport, Child Custody, Dismissal, Jurisdiction, Modificaiton, Visitation Rights

Trial court’s corder entered in post-divorce lititation, AFFIRMED; trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding mother in contempt for taking parties’ 11 year-old son to counseling because trial court’s previous order gave father final decision-making authority for child’s health and medical issues, and father disappoved of therapist to wom mother took child; trial court did not err when, after finding that mother withheld visitation from father, it dismissed contempt, visitation, and custody portions of mother’s petiton and did not permit mother to present evidence on merits of dismissed claims, pursuant to OCGA 19-9-24 (b); because mother filed current petition for modificaiton of child support 11 months after trial court dismissed her earlier petition for modificaiton of child support, trial court did not err in dismissing portion of mother’s peition seeking modificaiton of child support, pursuant to OCGA 19-6-15 (k)(2); trial court did not err as matter of law when it refused to allow guardian ad litem to interview child’s therapist without father’s consent because mother previously consented to entry of modified consent order appointing guardian ad litem and providing that guardian was not authorized to speak with child’s  therapist without permission of both parents; trial court did not abuse its discretion when it ordered mother to pay remainder of fees owed guardian ad litem because mother was ot prevailing party, and no statute required that trial court consider parties’ relative financial circumstances when apportioning shares of guardian’s fees pursuant to consent order ; trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to apply rule of sequestration to unidentifed woman in courtroom because woman did not testify; trial court did not lack jurisdiction to deny mother’s motion to set aside award of attorneys’ fees, despite fact that mother previously filed notice of appeal from underlaying judgment, because underlying judgment was final, and trial court’s award of attorney’s fees did not supplment, ament, alther, ormodify that judgment; mother’s application for sicretionary review of denial or her motion to set aside award of attorneys’ fees, proper, because where both OCGA 5-6-34 (a) and 5-6-35(a) are involved, application for appeal is required when uderlying subject matter of appeal is listed in 5-6-34(a).

Avren v. Garten, S11A0688 (05/16/2011).

Fulton County Daily Report, May 27, 2011

Share/Save
Comments Off

GA Jurisdicion and Findings of Fact

Posted Jun.06, 2011 by Cynthia J. Remboldt, Esq., under Custody, Divorce, Jurisdiction, UCCJEA

 Child Custody, Divorce, Jurisdiction, UCCJA

Judgment denying father’s motion to vacate judgment of divorce AFFIRMED, and judgment modifying father’s custody order, AFFIRMED; father’s contention that divorce court lacked jurisdiction based on residency of his children, whom he alleged resided in Ethiopia when divorce was filed and when divorce decree was issued in 2006, was moot, since trial court entered 2010 custody modification and parenting plan order, it was uncontested that children and their mother resided in DeKalb county then and father submitted himself to trial court’s personal jurisdiction when he filed his custody modification pleading and he appeared for hearing on same;  father’s contention that trial court erred in failing to make jurisdictional findings regarding children’s home state in body of 2010 custody modification and parenting plan on basis the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act generally requires such finds, rejected, since there is no such authority where, as here, the trial court did not decline jurisdiction on basis of being inconvenient forum or stay matter because of another custody action in foreign jurisdiction.

Sondium v. Getachew, 11 FCDR 1470

From:  Fulton County Daily Report:  May 27, 2011

Share/Save
Leave a Comment

Criminal contempt order requiring Rhode Island resident to pay $5K fine and be imprisoned for 200 days for her failure to comply with terms of temporary modification of parental grandparents’ visitation rights to her two children REVERSED.

Posted Oct.07, 2010 by Cynthia J. Remboldt, Esq., under Contempt, Custody, Grandparents, Jurisdiction, Modification, UCCJEA, Visitation

 Contempt, Jurisdiction, Modification, UCCJEA, Uniform Child Custody Jurisdicton

Criminal contempt order requiring Rhode Island resident to pay $5K fine and be imprisoned for 200 days for her failure to comply with terms of temporary modification of parental grandparents’ visitation rights to her two children REVERSED; trial court had jurisdiction over grandparents’ modification action, since initial custody determination complied with OCGA 19-9-61, children’s father still lived in Georgia, and personal jurisdiction over mother was not necessary in order to address requested modification; trial court lacked personal jurisdiction under Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) over mother for contempt and personal service of mother outside Georgia was invalid under circumstances;  Court relied on Ashburn v. Baker, 256 Ga. 507 (1986), which held that Georgia courts did not have personal jurisdiciton over non-risident mother, who was served outside Georgia, under either now-repealed UCCJEA or long arm statutue, and found the UCCJEA required same result; UCCJEA specifically addresses continuing jurisdiction of cusotdy issues, but not contempt issues and it did not repeal any existing statutory provisions covering divorce, custody, alimony or child support procedures; mother did not admit personal jurisdiciton when she failed to respond to discovery served with complaint, since return of service only showed that she was served with summons and complaint, not discovery; contempt order was not enforceable in Rhode Island pursuant to UCCJEA, since applicable provisions referred to custody determinations and did not includ contempt orders.

Daniels v. Barnes,  A07A1719 (03/04/08), 08 FCDR 795

Fulton County Daily Report, 03/21/2008

Share/Save
Leave a Comment

Denial of appellant’s motion to dismiss appellee’s complaint to record and modify Alabama child support order, REVERSED in GA.

Posted Sep.28, 2010 by Cynthia J. Remboldt, Esq., under Attorney Fees, Child Support, Jurisdiction, UCCJEA

 Child Support, Jurisdiction, UCCJEA

Denial of appellant’s motion to dismiss appellee’s complaint to record and modify Alabama child support order, REVERSED; trial court erred by finding that appellant was Georgia resident for these purposes and also erred by awarding attorneys’ fees to appellee on modification action; trial court erred in ruling that appellant resides in Georgia, since there was extensive evidence that appellant continues to consider Alabama his home and he intends to remain there.

Kean v. Marshall, A08A0828 (11/10/08), 08 FCDR 3730

Fulton County Daily Report, 12/05/2008.

Share/Save
Leave a Comment

GA Trial court lacked authority to credit appellant for his pre-trial payments of temporary alimony against final award.

Posted Jul.30, 2010 by Cynthia J. Remboldt, Esq., under Appeal, Common Law Marriage, Divorce

 A;;eals, Common Law Marriage, Evidence, Jurisdiction

Judgment and final divorce decree arising from parties’ common law marriage, AFFIRMED; Georgia recognizes valid common law marriages from other states, Alabama law applied with respect to common law marriage in this case and evidence, though conflicting, satisfied Alabama criteria for common law marriage; trial court did not err in admitting evidence of parties; conduct after they moved to Gerogia, since their cohabitation and public recognition of their marriage could corroborate other evidence of prior agreement to marry in Alabama; trial court lacked authority to credit appellant for his pre-trial payments of temporary alimony against final award; trial court had authority to enter October 22, 2009 judgment nunc pro tunc to April 7, 2009 and to order appellant’s monthly lump-sum alimony installments to begin on June 1, 2009 and, in any event, appellant benefitted from that order, since his monthly lump-sum payments were $500 less than his monthly temporary alimony payments; Courts had no jurisdiction to consider trial court’s December 1, 2009 contempt order, even if nunc pro tunc to November 19, 2009 provision of that order was proper, since trial court entered that order subsequent to final divorce decree and appellant’s enumeration regaruding contempt order was not redicated on proper and timely appeal.

Norman v. Ault, S10F0874 (06/07/2010), 10 FCDR 1821

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (06/18/2010)

Share/Save
Leave a Comment

GA courts must consider petitions for child support and custody, even if that child was 18 years old when it held the hearing.

Posted Jun.24, 2010 by Cynthia J. Remboldt, Esq., under Child Support, Custody, Jurisdiction

 Child Custody, Child Support, Jurisdiction

Dismissal of mother’s petition for change of custody, which included request for child support, REVERSED; trial court erred in ruling that it lacked jurisdiction over matter, on basis that child was 18 years old when it held hearing, since mother filed petition when child was still minor and child’s change of legal custody, even for brief period of time prior to his majority, was relevant to question of child support for that period of time; ruling on child support petition after child reached majority did not divest mother of her right to seek award of child support from time peition was filed through remaining period of child’s majoirty;  O.C.G.A. § 19-6-15(e) provides that custodial parent may seek to extend child support payments for child who has reach age of majority, but has not completed his or her secondary education, as alleged herein; trial court erred in failing to consider mother’s petition for change of custody as petition for child support, since petition included request ofr child support and child support claim was inextricably tried to mother’s peition to gain legal custody as O.C.G.A. § 19-6-19 requires.

Wade f/k/a Corinthian v. Corinthian, S08A0363; S08A0363 (05/19/08), 08 FCDR 1694.

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (05/30/08)

Share/Save
Leave a Comment

GA order denying father’s petition to legitimate minor and terminating father’s parental rights AFFIRMED

Posted Apr.10, 2010 by Cynthia J. Remboldt, Esq., under Jurisdiction, Parental Rights, Paternity / Legitimation

 Jurisdiction, Legitimation, Parential Rights

Order denying father’s petition to legitimate minor and terminating father’s parental rights AFFIRMED, as trial court did not err in denying father’s legitimation petition; father abandoned his opportunity interest to develop relationship with minor, since father did not spend any significant time with minor, after living with minor for one year, and did not pay child support or send cards or letters to minor; father’s argument that trial court wrongfully denied right to counsel during termination of parental rights hearing, REJECTED, because he lacked standing to challenge termination of his rights; father’s contention that juvenile court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, REJECTED, because juvenile court has original jurisdiction unless termination petition is filed in connection with formal adoption proceedings.

In the Interest of J.S., A10A0186 (02/12/2010), 10 FCDR 413.

From:  Fulton County Daily Report, 2/26/2010.

Share/Save
Leave a Comment

In GA a high income deviation from presumptive child support award must include all required findings.

Posted Apr.07, 2010 by Cynthia J. Remboldt, Esq., under Child Support, Jurisdiction, Modification

 Child Support, Jurisdiction, Modification

Judgment of trial court REVERSED in father’s action under OCGA § 19-11-12 for modification of his monthly child support obligation as trial court applied high income deviation from presumptive child support award without making all required findings under OCGA § 19-6-15 (c)(2) – trial court’s order failed to state how application of presumptive amount of child support would be unjust or inappropriate and how upward deviation would serve best interest of children; Court has jurisdiction over appeals from orders in child support modification proceedings, which arise from prior divorce or alimony action, regardless of code section under which parties pursued modification, i.e. OCGA § 19-11-12 or 19-6-19, and Court had jurisdiction in this case, because case involved alimony for support of children; striking and redocketing appeal was not necessary to preserve Court’s ultimate jurisdiction in this case.

Spurlock v. Department of Human Resources, S09A1475 (2/15/2010), 10 FCDR 399.

From:  Fulton County Daily Report, 2/26/2010.

Share/Save
Leave a Comment

GA and UIFSA Statue of Limitation

Posted Mar.14, 2010 by Cynthia J. Remboldt, Esq., under Alimony, Contempt, Jurisdiction, UIFSA

 Alimony, Choice of Law, Contempt, Jurisdiction, UIFSA

Dismissal of appellant’s petition to register and enforce 1995 Massachusetts support order against her ex-husband in principal amount of $421,465.84, REVERSED; trial court erred in ruling that order could not be enforced because it was dormant under Georgia law;  appellee’s contention that Massachusetts judgment did not constitute support order under Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (“UIFSA”) on basis that it was contempt order, AFFIRMED, since order included finding that appellee was in contempt of original judgment of divorce, but also established appellee’s arrearages for alimony and statutory interest; Massachusetts judgment was order and judgment for benefit of former spouse providing for arrearages and interest within definition of support order under O.C.G.A. § 9-11-101 (21); Massachusetts 20-year statute of limitation controlled over Georgia’s 7-year dormancy law, since choice of law provisions of UIFSA provide that law of jurisdiction, which issued support order, “governs the nature, extent, amount, and duration of current payments and other obligations of support and the payment of arrearages under the order;” ‘O.C.G.A. § 19-11-163 (b) provides that, ‘ “[i]n a proceeding for arrearages, the statute of limitation under the laws of Georgia or of the issuing state, whichever is longer, applies,” ‘ in any event.

Sussman v. Sussman, A09A2289 (12/02/09), 09 FCDR 3930

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

Share/Save
Leave a Comment

GA Insufficient Service of Process Waived

Posted Mar.11, 2010 by Cynthia J. Remboldt, Esq., under Divorce, Jurisdiction

 Jurisdiction, Process of Service

Grant of ex-wife’s petition to modify parties’ divorce decree, AFFIRMED, as ex-husband waived any objection to insufficient service of process by personally appearing at hearing on modification petition.

Hudson v. Easterling, A09A2396 (11/19/09)

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (12/11/2009)

Share/Save
Leave a Comment
« Older Entries

Search

Categories

  • Adoption (7)
  • Alimony (14)
  • Appeal (26)
  • Articles (3)
  • Attorney Fees (25)
  • Capacity (3)
  • Child Support (47)
  • Common Law Marriage (1)
  • Contempt (17)
  • Custody (63)
  • Deprivation (23)
  • DFACS (1)
  • Divorce (46)
  • Equitable Division (23)
  • Evidence (20)
  • Grandparents (11)
  • Guardan Ad Litem (1)
  • Insurance Benefits (1)
  • Jurisdiction (24)
  • Legitimation (1)
  • Mediation (1)
  • Military (1)
  • Modification (19)
  • Parental Rights (25)
  • Paternity / Legitimation (8)
  • Prenuptial Agreement (4)
  • Property Settlement (2)
  • Service by Publication (1)
  • Service of Process (1)
  • Settlement Agreement (11)
  • Temporary Protective Order (TPO) (3)
  • Transcripts (10)
  • Trial Counsel (4)
  • UCCJEA (8)
  • UIFSA (2)
  • Uncategorized (7)
  • Visitation (12)

Archives

  • February 2012 (1)
  • January 2012 (8)
  • December 2011 (8)
  • November 2011 (6)
  • July 2011 (4)
  • June 2011 (6)
  • May 2011 (9)
  • April 2011 (3)
  • March 2011 (8)
  • February 2011 (8)
  • January 2011 (7)
  • October 2010 (10)
  • September 2010 (7)
  • August 2010 (6)
  • July 2010 (10)
  • June 2010 (10)
  • May 2010 (11)
  • April 2010 (9)
  • March 2010 (9)
  • February 2010 (10)
  • January 2010 (11)
  • December 2009 (10)
  • November 2009 (10)
  • October 2009 (3)
  • September 2009 (7)
 
Powered by WordPress.   A CJ Remboldt Blog
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation.
Copyright 2010 by Cynthia J. Remboldt, JD/MBA. All rights reserved. You may reproduce materials available at this site for your own personal use and for non-commercial distribution. All copies must include this copyright statement.