Trenice Rhymer-Mayo v. Terrence Herrington

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 23, 2020
DocketA21A0123
StatusPublished

This text of Trenice Rhymer-Mayo v. Terrence Herrington (Trenice Rhymer-Mayo v. Terrence Herrington) 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
Trenice Rhymer-Mayo v. Terrence Herrington, (Ga. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ September 23, 2020

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A21A0123. TRENICE RHYMER-MAYO v. TERRENCE HERRINGTON.

Trenise Rhymer-Mayo filed this direct appeal from the trial court’s order awarding attorney fees. Rhymer-Mayo initiated the action in the trial court by filing a petition for a stalking protective order against her ex-husband, Terrence Herrington. Rhymer-Mayo later voluntarily dismissed the action, and the trial court ordered her to pay $2,000 in attorney fees. The trial court’s order, however, is not subject to direct appeal. Pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2), a party must follow the discretionary appeal procedures to obtain review in a domestic relations case, including those that involve family violence. See Schmidt v. Schmidt, 270 Ga. 461 (1) (510 SE2d 810) (1999). “[T]he term ‘family violence’ means . . . acts between past or present spouses, persons who are parents of the same child, parents and children, stepparents and stepchildren, foster parents and foster children, or other persons living or formerly living in the same household[.]” OCGA § 19-13-1. “Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996). Although Rhymer-Mayo filled out a pre-printed petition seeking relief from stalking, “there is no magic in nomenclature [and a] document is to be construed by its substance or function, rather than by its name.” Giles v. State, 257 Ga. App. 65, 69 (2) (570 SE2d 375) (2002). Because this case involves allegations of violence between former spouses, it falls within the scope of OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2). Rhymer- Mayo’s failure to follow the discretionary appeal procedures deprives us of jurisdiction to consider this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 09/23/2020 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

Giles v. State
570 S.E.2d 375 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2002)
Schmidt v. Schmidt
510 S.E.2d 810 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1999)
Smoak v. Department of Human Resources
471 S.E.2d 60 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Trenice Rhymer-Mayo v. Terrence Herrington, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trenice-rhymer-mayo-v-terrence-herrington-gactapp-2020.