Krystle Venticinque v. Amber Lair

• Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
• Decided: June 25, 2025
• Docket: A25A1011
• Status: Published

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ June 25, 2025

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A25A1011. VENTICINQUE v. LAIR.

Krystle Venticinque, the biological parent of a minor child, appeals from an order awarding her former domestic partner, Amber Lair, joint legal custody of and visitation with the child. Among other things, Venticinque argues that the trial court erred in adjudicating Lair as an equitable caregiver of the child under OCGA § 19-7- 3.1. As part of that argument, Venticinque challenges the constitutionality of OCGA § 19-7-3.1. She also raised her constitutional challenge to the trial court, which expressly ruled on the challenge in adjudicating Lair as an equitable caregiver. In Dias v. Boone, 320 Ga. 785, 805 (3) (c) (912 SE2d 547) (2025), our Supreme Court expressed “serious concerns about the constitutionality of [OCGA § 19-7-3.1]. . . .” But the Court did not reach those concerns in Dias because it was able to resolve the case on a different ground since “the petition for adjudication as an equitable caregiver was based on . . . actions undertaken solely prior to the effective date of the statute[.]” Id. at 806 (2) (c) (emphasis supplied). That different ground does not exist here. The child in this case was born after the effective date of OCGA § 19-7-3.1. Consequently, this case raises the serious constitutional concerns to which Dias referred. The Georgia Supreme Court “has exclusive jurisdiction over . . . all cases in which the constitutionality of a law, ordinance, or constitutional provision has been called into question. Atlanta Independent School System v. Lane, 266 Ga. 657 (1) (469 SE2d 22) (1996); Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. II (1). This case appears to fall within the Supreme Court’s exclusive subject-matter jurisdiction. We further note that the Supreme Court has “the ultimate responsibility for construing the constitutional provisions regarding appellate jurisdiction. . . .” Saxton v. Coastal Dialysis & Med. Clinic, 267 Ga. 177, 178 (476 SE2d 587) (1996). For this reason, we hereby TRANSFER this case to the Supreme Court for disposition.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 06/25/2025 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.