Jason Werkman v. Debbie Powell

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedApril 5, 2022
DocketA22A1178
StatusPublished

This text of Jason Werkman v. Debbie Powell (Jason Werkman v. Debbie Powell) 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
Jason Werkman v. Debbie Powell, (Ga. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ April 05, 2022

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A22A1178. JASON WERKMAN v. DEBBIE POWELL.

Debbie Powell and Jason Werkman were divorced in Texas, and Werkman was awarded primary custody of their three minor children. In August 2017, Powell filed an action in Georgia to domesticate the Texas orders and sought a modification of custody and support. In 2019, the trial court awarded Powell custody and recalculated child support. In its “Order on Attorney’s Fees,” entered in 2021, the court ordered Jason Werkman to pay attorney fees incurred by Powell in connection with the modification action in the amount of $26,261.50, which included $836.06 pursuant to OCGA § 9-15-14 (b), $13,115.72 pursuant to OCGA § 19-6-15 (k) (5), and $12,309.72 pursuant to OCGA § 19-9-3 (g). Werkman filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s order. However, we lack jurisdiction. Where, as here, the underlying action involves rights and obligations arising out of a divorce decree and does not involve child custody, the case is a domestic relations matter within the meaning of OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2). See Walker v. Estate of Mays, 279 Ga. 652, 653 (1) (619 SE2d 679) (2005). Appeals in such matters must be initiated by filing an application for discretionary review. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2), (b); accord Voyles v. Voyles, 301 Ga. 44, 47 (799 SE2d 160) (2017) (an appeal in a domestic relations case in which custody is not at issue must be brought by discretionary application). Additionally, an order awarding OCGA § 9-15-14 attorney fees also requires an application for discretionary appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (10). “[C]ompliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Fabe v. Floyd, 199 Ga. App. 322, 332 (1) (405 SE2d 265) (1991). Werkman’s failure to comply with discretionary appeal procedures deprives this Court of jurisdiction over the appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 04/05/2022 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

Fabe v. Floyd
405 S.E.2d 265 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1991)
Walker v. Estate of Mays
619 S.E.2d 679 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2005)
Voyles v. Voyles
799 S.E.2d 160 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jason Werkman v. Debbie Powell, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jason-werkman-v-debbie-powell-gactapp-2022.