Celeste Spencer v. Vanessa Spencer

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJune 11, 2025
DocketA25D0399
StatusPublished

This text of Celeste Spencer v. Vanessa Spencer (Celeste Spencer v. Vanessa Spencer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Celeste Spencer v. Vanessa Spencer, (Ga. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ June 11, 2025

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A25D0399. CELESTE SPENCER v. VANESSA SPENCER.

In this equitable caregiver action, Celeste Spencer filed a motion to set aside the court’s 2023 consent order granting custody of a minor child to his maternal aunt, Vanessa Spencer. Vanessa Spencer filed a motion to dismiss, arguing among other things that jurisdiction was proper in Colorado and requesting attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14. On February 5, 2025, the court granted the motion to dismiss, but reserved the issue of attorney fees. The court ultimately denied Vanessa’s motion for attorney fees on April 22, 2025. Celeste Spencer then filed this application for discretionary appeal on May 13, 2025. We lack jurisdiction. An application for discretionary appeal must be filed within 30 days of the entry of the order to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-35 (d). The requirements of OCGA § 5-6-35 are jurisdictional, and this Court cannot accept an application for appeal not made in compliance therewith. Boyle v. State, 190 Ga. App. 734, 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989). Celeste Spencer did not file her application for discretionary appeal until 76 days after the court denied her motion to set aside, which is untimely. Celeste Spencer asserts that the court’s order was not final until the trial court resolved the attorney fee issue. However, the pendency of an OCGA § 9-15-14 attorney fee issue does not affect the finality of a case for purposes of appealing the judgment. See Hill v. Buttram, 255 Ga. App. 123, 124 (564 SE2d 531) (2002). Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction to consider Celeste Spencer’s challenge to the court’s February 5 order, and this application is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 06/11/2025 I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

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

Related

Boyle v. State of Georgia
380 S.E.2d 57 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
Hill v. Buttram
564 S.E.2d 531 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Celeste Spencer v. Vanessa Spencer, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/celeste-spencer-v-vanessa-spencer-gactapp-2025.