Monica Susanne McKee v. Thomas Allen Baggett

• Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
• Decided: July 10, 2023
• Docket: A23A1171
• Status: Published

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ July 10, 2023

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A23A1171. MONICA SUSANNE MCKEE v. THOMAS ALLEN BAGGETT.

In 2011, Monica Susanne McKee and Thomas Allen Baggett were divorced pursuant to a final judgment and decree of divorce. The divorce decree incorporated a settlement agreement which provided, in relevant part, that McKee would transfer her interest in the parties’ marital home to Baggett; that McKee would have “a protected interest in the home in the amount of [a] 50/50 split”; and that “upon the sale or transfer of the home, the protected interest shall be paid.” In June 2011, McKee executed a quitclaim deed conveying her interest in the marital residence to Baggett.1 In 2022, Baggett sold the home, and McKee demanded 50% of the proceeds, claiming that the settlement agreement entitled her to the same. In response, Baggett filed an action for declaratory judgment, seeking a ruling that McKee was not entitled to any of the sale proceeds. The trial court ruled in favor of Baggett and also awarded him attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14. McKee then filed this direct appeal. We, however, 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); Voyles v. Voyles, 301 Ga. 44, 47 (799 SE2d 160) (2017) (an appeal

1 The parties disagree as to whether Monica received any funds she was entitled to at the time of the transfer. in a domestic relations case in which custody is not at issue must be brought by discretionary application). Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional. Hair Restoration Specialists v. State of Georgia, 360 Ga. App. 901, 903 (862 SE2d 564) (2021). Accordingly, McKee’s failure to comply with the discretionary application procedures set forth in OCGA § 5-6-35 deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Voyles, 301 Ga. at 47. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 07/10/2023 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.