Cicely Mitchell v. Travis Grant, III

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedDecember 24, 2019
DocketA20A0705
StatusPublished

This text of Cicely Mitchell v. Travis Grant, III (Cicely Mitchell v. Travis Grant, III) 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
Cicely Mitchell v. Travis Grant, III, (Ga. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ December 09, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A20A0705. CICELY MITCHELL v. TRAVIS GRANT, III.

This appeal stems from a custody proceeding in which Cicely Mitchell filed a motion to dismiss the counterclaim for modification of custody, filed by Travis Grant, III. The trial court denied Mitchell’s motion to dismiss and allowed Grant to proceed with his counterclaim. Mitchell then filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction. “All judgments or orders in child custody cases awarding, refusing to change, or modifying child custody” are directly appealable. OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (11). The order at issue here, however, did not include any decision as to custody. Instead, it merely denied Mitchell’s motion to dismiss Grant’s counterclaim for modification of custody. Therefore, it is an interlocutory ruling that may be appealed only by following the interlocutory appeal procedure of OCGA § 5-6-34 (b). See Davis v. Davis, 242 Ga. 322, 322 (249 SE2d 90) (1978); see also Murphy v. Murphy, 322 Ga. App. 829, 830 (747 SE2d 21) (2013). Mitchell’s failure to comply with the interlocutory appeal requirements deprives us of jurisdiction to review this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 12/09/2019 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

Davis v. Davis
249 S.E.2d 90 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1978)
Murphy v. Murphy
747 S.E.2d 21 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Cicely Mitchell v. Travis Grant, III, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cicely-mitchell-v-travis-grant-iii-gactapp-2019.