Smoak v. Department of Human Resources, A96A0083
| Decision Date | 03 May 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. A96A0083,A96A0083 |
| Citation | 221 Ga.App. 257,471 S.E.2d 60 |
| Parties | SMOAK, v. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Emerson Carey, Jr., Atlanta, for appellant.
Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General, William C. Joy, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Kevin O'Connor, Assistant Attorney General; and Harold H. Hobbs, Blakely, for appellee.
Eugene Smoak, Jr. appeals from an order for his arrest predicated on his failure to purge himself of contempt by paying a child support arrears. Held:
OCGA § 5-6-35(a)(2), (b) and (d) require that appeals from judgments or orders in divorce, alimony, child custody, and other domestic relations cases must be taken by application, and that application must be filed within 30 days of the entry of the order complained of. This discretionary appeals procedure is applicable to cases involving petitions to establish paternity, Brown v. Dept. of Human Resources, 204 Ga.App. 27, 418 S.E.2d 404; and judgments of contempt regarding a domestic relations decree, Russo v. Manning, 252 Ga. 155, 312 S.E.2d 319. "Regardless how this case was couched or pursued, it involves collection of child support moneys and it is a domestic relations matter." Davis v. Welch, 205 Ga.App. 462, 463, 422 S.E.2d 323. Thus, an application for discretionary appeal was required in the case sub judice. Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional. Fabe v. Floyd, 199 Ga.App. 322, 332, 405 S.E.2d 265. Since Smoak has not followed the mandatory appeal procedures, his appeal must be dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rodriguez v. Nunez
...of OCGA § 5-6-35." Brown v. Dept. of Human Resources, 204 Ga.App. 27, 418 S.E.2d 404 (1992); see also Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga.App. 257, 471 S.E.2d 60 (1996). We must read these cases in context, however, and recognize that they involve actions against a father or putative ......
-
Fitzgerald v. Department of Human Resources, A98A0805
...S.E.2d 544 (1995); Dept. of Human Resources v. Anderson, 218 Ga.App. 528, 462 S.E.2d 439 (1995); see also Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga.App. 257, 471 S.E.2d 60 (1996). "Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional. Fabe v. Floyd, 199 Ga.App. 322, 332, 40......
-
Hair Restoration Specialists, Inc. v. State
..., those decisions still apply."Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional." Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources , 221 Ga. App. 257, 257, 471 S.E.2d 60 (1996). Hair Restoration's failure to follow the proper procedure deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal. As ......
-
Jordan-Philadelphia v. Am. Express Nat'l Bank
...357 (509 S.E.2d 655) (1998). "Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional." Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga.App. 257, 257 (471 S.E.2d 60) (1996). Moreover, whether Jordan-Philadelphia's extraordinary motion is construed as a motion for reconsideration or ......