Kristin M. Gotham v. Michael Hyser

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 19, 2025
DocketA25A1321
StatusPublished

This text of Kristin M. Gotham v. Michael Hyser (Kristin M. Gotham v. Michael Hyser) 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
Kristin M. Gotham v. Michael Hyser, (Ga. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ March 19, 2025

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A25A1321. KRISTIN M. GOTHAM v. MICHAEL HYSER.

Michael Hyser and Kristin Gotham were divorced in 2020, and the divorce decree incorporated terms regarding financial obligations from the settlement agreement. In 2024, Hyser filed a petition for declaratory judgment and petition for modification of alimony to clarify and modify those financial obligations. Hyser then filed a motion for partial summary judgment, which the trial court granted. Gotham then filed this direct appeal. We, however, 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). Because Hyser seeks to modify alimony, this is a domestic relations case within the meaning of the statute, and compliance with the discretionary appeal statute is therefore required in order to appeal. See Walker v. Estate of Mays, 279 Ga. 652, 653 (1) (619 SE2d 679) (2005). The fact that this matter stems from an “action for declaratory judgment makes no difference because the subject matter was domestic relations and the judgment is one entered in a domestic relations case.” Weaver v. Jones, 260 Ga. 493, 493-494 (2) (396 SE2d 890) (1990); see also Bedford v. Bedford, 246 Ga. 780, 781 (273 SE2d 167) (1980) ( “[J]urisdiction [over a domestic relations case] is not changed by the fact that the appeal seeks a review of a summary judgment.”). Accordingly, Gotham’s failure to follow the discretionary appeal procedure deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Evans v. Jackson, 368 Ga. App. 170, 174 (1) (889 SE2d 343) (2023).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 03/19/2025 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

Walker v. Estate of Mays
619 S.E.2d 679 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2005)
Weaver v. Jones
396 S.E.2d 890 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1990)
Bedford v. Bedford
273 S.E.2d 167 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Kristin M. Gotham v. Michael Hyser, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kristin-m-gotham-v-michael-hyser-gactapp-2025.