Courtney Elizabeth Stephenson v. Mark Alexander Stephenson

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Courtney Elizabeth Stephenson v. Mark Alexander Stephenson

DecidedJune 2, 2021

DocketA21A1305

StatusPublished

This text of Courtney Elizabeth Stephenson v. Mark Alexander Stephenson (Courtney Elizabeth Stephenson v. Mark Alexander Stephenson) 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

Courtney Elizabeth Stephenson v. Mark Alexander Stephenson, (Ga. Ct. App. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ May 14, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A21A1305. COURTNEY ELIZABETH STEPHENSON v. MARK ALEXANDER STEPHENSON.

The parties were divorced in May 2018. A settlement agreement incorporated into the divorce decree provided that the husband was to pay the wife alimony. In September 2019, the wife filed a motion to correct clerical mistake under OCGA § 9- 11-60 (g), claiming that the alimony provision of the settlement agreement contained a scrivener’s error. The trial court denied the motion, and the wife filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction. Appeals from “judgments or orders in divorce, alimony, and other domestic relations cases” must be made by application for discretionary appeal. OCGA § 5-6- 35 (a) (2). In this regard, when “the underlying subject matter, i.e., the issues sought to be appealed, clearly arises from or is ancillary to divorce proceedings, or is derived from a marital relationship and divorce, the appeal is within the ambit of [OCGA § 5- 6-35 (a) (2)].” Russo v. Manning, 252 Ga. 155, 155 (312 SE2d 319) (1984); see Rebich v. Miles, 264 Ga. 467, 469 (448 SE2d 192) (1994) (“[T]he underlying subject matter generally controls over the relief sought in determining the proper procedure to follow to appeal.”). Thus, here the wife was required to file an application for discretionary review under OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2), and her failure to do so deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal. See Russo, 252 Ga. at 156. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 05/14/2021 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

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ May 14, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A21A1305. COURTNEY ELIZABETH STEPHENSON v. MARK ALEXANDER STEPHENSON.

The parties were divorced in May 2018. A settlement agreement incorporated into the divorce decree provided that the husband was to pay the wife alimony. In September 2019, the wife filed a motion to correct clerical mistake under OCGA § 9- 11-60 (g), claiming that the alimony provision of the settlement agreement contained a scrivener’s error. The trial court denied the motion, and the wife filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction. Appeals from “judgments or orders in divorce, alimony, and other domestic relations cases” must be made by application for discretionary appeal. OCGA § 5-6- 35 (a) (2). In this regard, when “the underlying subject matter, i.e., the issues sought to be appealed, clearly arises from or is ancillary to divorce proceedings, or is derived from a marital relationship and divorce, the appeal is within the ambit of [OCGA § 5- 6-35 (a) (2)].” Russo v. Manning, 252 Ga. 155, 155 (312 SE2d 319) (1984); see Rebich v. Miles, 264 Ga. 467, 469 (448 SE2d 192) (1994) (“[T]he underlying subject matter generally controls over the relief sought in determining the proper procedure to follow to appeal.”). Thus, here the wife was required to file an application for discretionary review under OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2), and her failure to do so deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal. See Russo, 252 Ga. at 156. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 05/14/2021 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Courtney Elizabeth Stephenson v. Mark Alexander Stephenson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/courtney-elizabeth-stephenson-v-mark-alexander-stephenson-gactapp-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack