Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Burnett v. Coleman

Burnett v. Coleman

317 S.E.2d 546, 170 Ga. App. 394, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 1912
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided February 28, 1984·No. 67444·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Carley, Judge.

Appellant brings a direct appeal from a judgment holding her in contempt of an order which granted appellee visitation rights to the parties’ child. “Visitation privileges are, of course, part of custody. [Cits.]” Ledford v. Bowers, 248 Ga. 804, 805 (286 SE2d 293) (1982). Accordingly, it is clear that the instant case is subject to the provisions of OCGA § 5-6-35, because it is an appeal from a judgment holding appellant in contempt of a child custody order. OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2). As such, the instant case is not directly appealable and must be dismissed because of appellant’s failure to follow the procedure necessary to secure a discretionary appeal. Godbold v. Godbold, 245 Ga. 121 (263 SE2d 440) (1980); Courson v. Ridley, 247 Ga. 171 (276 SE2d 45) (1981).

Appeal dismissed.

Deen, P. J., and Banke, J. concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Burnett v. Coleman, 317 S.E.2d 546, 170 Ga. App. 394, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 1912 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984).

317 S.E.2d 546 (Burnett v. Coleman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Moore v. Moore-McKinney
678 S.E.2d 152 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2009)
Hosch v. Hosch
361 S.E.2d 686 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1987)
Tuttle v. Stauffer
338 S.E.2d 544 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1985)
Dean v. State
338 S.E.2d 711 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1985)
\In re S. G. & N. G.
334 S.E.2d 384 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1985)