Salvador Diaz-Verson, Jr. v. Patricia Diaz-Verson
This text of Salvador Diaz-Verson, Jr. v. Patricia Diaz-Verson (Salvador Diaz-Verson, Jr. v. Patricia Diaz-Verson) 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.
Opinion
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA,____________________ November 18, 2020
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
A21A0576. PATRICIA DIAZ-VERSON v. SALVADOR DIAZ-VERSON, JR. A21A0589. SALVADOR DIAZ-VERSON, JR. v. PATRICIA DIAZ-VERSON.
Patricia Diaz-Verson and Salvador Diaz-Verson, Jr., were divorced in 2011. In 2019, Patricia filed a citation for contempt asserting that Salvador violated several terms of the final judgment and decree of divorce. Following a hearing, the trial court held Salvador in contempt for failing to certify annually to Patricia that a life insurance policy was in force, but found that he did not violate the other terms. In Case No. A21A0576, Patricia filed a timely direct appeal from this order, and in Case No. A21A0589, Salvador filed a timely cross-appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction in both cases. Appeals from orders in domestic relations cases, including orders holding or declining to hold persons in contempt, must be pursued by discretionary application. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2); see also Norman v. Ault, 287 Ga. 324, 330-331 (6) (695 SE2d 633) (2010); Russo v. Manning, 252 Ga. 155, 155-156 (312 SE2d 319) (1984). “[C]ompliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Fabe v. Floyd, 199 Ga. App. 322, 332 (1) (405 SE2d 265) (1991). Patricia’s failure to follow the discretionary appeal procedure deprives us of jurisdiction over Case No. A21A0576. Because this Court must have jurisdiction over a valid appeal in order to have jurisdiction over a cross-appeal, we necessarily must dismiss Salvador’s cross-appeal in Case No. A21A0589. See Jarrard v. Copeland, 205 Ga. App. 20, 21 (421 SE2d 84) (1992). For the foregoing reasons, these appeals are hereby DISMISSED.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 11/18/2020 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Salvador Diaz-Verson, Jr. v. Patricia Diaz-Verson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salvador-diaz-verson-jr-v-patricia-diaz-verson-gactapp-2020.