Moon v. Moon

524 S.E.2d 219, 271 Ga. 685, 1999 Ga. LEXIS 964
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided November 15, 1999·No. S99A0758·Published

Opinion

Carley, Justice,

dissenting.

Because the record clearly shows that parental fitness was not a contested issue below, this case is ripe for decision. I therefore dissent to the majority’s remand for the purpose of addressing the previously unchallenged issue of parental fitness.

[686]*686Decided November 15, 1999. Howard G. Sokol, Vicky O. Kimbrell, Phyllis J. Holmen, Lisa J. Krisher, for appellant. Martin L. Fierman, Alan W. Thrower, Kutner & Bloom, Jean M. Kutner, for appellees. David A. Webster, Bondurant, Mixson & Elmore, Lynn M. Adam, Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, William C. Joy, Senior Assistant Attorney General, ShalenA. Sgrosso, Assistant Attorney General, amici curiae.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Moon v. Moon, 524 S.E.2d 219, 271 Ga. 685, 1999 Ga. LEXIS 964 (Ga. 1999).

524 S.E.2d 219 (Moon v. Moon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.