Court Filings

The Court of Appeals dismissed a direct appeal by Tyrone Eric Taylor-Shorter challenging a trial court’s orders in a child support action brought by the Georgia Department of Human Services. The court concluded it lacked jurisdiction because appeals in domestic relations matters, including actions to establish parental support obligations, must be pursued by discretionary application under OCGA § 5-6-35(a)(2). Because Taylor-Shorter did not follow the discretionary-appeal procedure, the court granted the State’s motion to dismiss the appeal without reaching the merits of his challenges.

The Georgia Court of Appeals dismissed Susanne E. Krupa’s direct appeal from a final divorce decree because appeals in divorce and other domestic relations cases must be pursued by discretionary application under OCGA § 5-6-35. Krupa filed a notice of appeal rather than the required discretionary application, and the court held that compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional. Because Krupa did not follow that procedure, the court granted Timothy E. McLane’s motion to dismiss and dismissed the appeal.

The Court of Appeals dismissed Chuka Anene’s discretionary application for review of a February 3, 2026 divorce judgment because it was filed outside the 30-day statutory deadline. Anene filed the application on March 27, 2026 — 52 days after entry of the decree — and the court determined it lacked jurisdiction to consider untimely applications under OCGA § 5-6-35(d). The court therefore dismissed the application as untimely, noting a prior direct appeal by Anene had already been dismissed as improper in divorce cases.

The Georgia Court of Appeals dismissed Russell Carl Nast’s direct appeal of the trial court’s October 8, 2025 order confirming an arbitration award and granting a divorce because appeals in divorce cases must proceed by discretionary-appeal application under OCGA § 5-6-35(a)(2). The court concluded the proper procedure was an application for discretionary appeal, and that procedure is jurisdictional, so the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the direct appeal. The court granted the motion to dismiss and denied the respondent’s request for a frivolous-appeal penalty.

The Georgia Court of Appeals dismissed an attempted direct appeal by Olufeyijimi Awofadeju from a final divorce decree entered December 22, 2025. The court held it lacked jurisdiction because appeals in divorce and other domestic relations matters require a discretionary-appeal application under OCGA § 5-6-35, and the appellant did not follow that procedure. Because use of the discretionary-appeal process is jurisdictional, the improperly filed direct appeal could not proceed and was dismissed on April 22, 2026.

The Court of Appeals dismissed Kentay Smith’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Smith sought review of post-October 17, 2025 orders after filing a notice of appeal on March 2, 2026. The court held that the controlling final order was entered October 17, 2025, and Smith’s notice of appeal was not filed within the 30-day statutory deadline. The February 19, 2026 order merely stated the case was closed and made no new substantive custody ruling, so it was not appealable. Motions to expedite and for emergency consideration were also dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The Court of Appeals dismissed two direct appeals challenging a trial court’s award of $5,005 in attorney fees and a contempt finding in a domestic relations case because the appellants did not follow the required discretionary-review procedure. The trial court had apportioned the fee award between the father (Randy Harling, Jr.) and his former counsel (Bataski Bailey). The Court of Appeals held it lacked jurisdiction because Georgia law requires an application for discretionary review to appeal orders in domestic relations matters and awards under OCGA § 9-15-14. Noncompliance with that procedure is jurisdictional, so the appeals were dismissed on April 16, 2026.

The Court of Appeals dismissed Kyle Ramsey’s direct appeal of a twelve-month protective order granted to Kristina Ramsey under Georgia’s Family Violence Act for lack of jurisdiction. The court explained that appeals in domestic relations and Family Violence Act matters must be pursued by filing an application for discretionary appeal in the appellate court rather than by a trial-court notice of appeal. Because Kyle did not follow the mandatory discretionary-appeal procedure, the Court concluded it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal.

The Court of Appeals dismissed Kreslyn Barron Odum’s application for discretionary appeal challenging the trial court’s denial of her motion to set aside an order requiring her to pay half of a guardian ad litem’s fees. The court held it lacked jurisdiction because the underlying custody case remains pending and the order is interlocutory. Odum failed to follow interlocutory appeal procedures, including obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the trial court, so the discretionary-appeal process could not cure that jurisdictional defect.

The Georgia Court of Appeals dismissed Husband’s direct appeal from a final divorce judgment for lack of jurisdiction. The court explained that appeals in divorce and related domestic relations matters must be initiated by filing an application for discretionary review under OCGA § 5-6-35, and that compliance with that procedure is jurisdictional. Because Husband did not follow the required discretionary-appeal procedure, the Court of Appeals concluded it could not consider the appeal and dismissed the case.

The Georgia Court of Appeals dismissed a direct appeal filed by Chuka Anene from a trial court’s final judgment and decree of divorce because appeals in divorce and other domestic relations matters require a discretionary-appeal application under OCGA § 5-6-35. The court explained that compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional and cited precedent holding the same. Because the appellant did not follow that mandatory procedure, the Court of Appeals concluded it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal on April 7, 2026.

The Georgia Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal filed by Demarcus Davis from a final divorce judgment entered January 6, 2026. The court held that appeals in domestic relations cases must be brought by application for discretionary appeal under OCGA § 5-6-35(a)(2). Davis filed only a notice of appeal and asked the court to treat it as a discretionary application, but the court found that compliance with the discretionary-appeal procedure is jurisdictional. Because Davis did not file the required application, the court granted Young Seon Jo’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal.

The Court of Appeals dismissed Tommy Martin’s direct appeal of a trial court order denying his motion to confirm service and reinstate a child support enforcement case because the court lacked jurisdiction. Georgia law requires appeals in domestic relations matters, including child support collection, to proceed by application for discretionary review. Martin used a direct appeal rather than the required discretionary-review procedure, and that failure is jurisdictional, so the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal without addressing the merits.

The Georgia Court of Appeals dismissed a direct appeal by the mother of minor J. G. challenging a juvenile court order that terminated her parental rights. The court held it lacked jurisdiction because the mother failed to file the required application for discretionary review under Georgia law. The opinion cites the statute and precedent establishing that compliance with the discretionary-review procedure is jurisdictional, so dismissal — not a decision on the merits of the termination — was required.

The Georgia Court of Appeals reviewed the record and determined that discretionary review was not appropriate in William Paul Bradley, Jr.’s case. The court concluded that granting the application for discretionary appeal was improvident and therefore dismissed the appeal. This order ends this Court of Appeals proceeding without addressing the merits of the underlying dispute.

The Georgia Court of Appeals reviewed the record in Anderson v. Anderson and determined the case was not suitable for discretionary review. The court concluded that granting the appeal was improvident and therefore dismissed the appeal. The order is a short procedural disposition without discussion of the underlying merits of the parties' dispute.

The Court of Appeals dismissed Jesse James Larson’s direct appeal from a trial court divorce decree because Georgia law requires appeals in divorce matters to be pursued by application for discretionary review. The court explained that compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure under OCGA § 5-6-35 is jurisdictional, cited prior decisions applying that rule, and concluded it lacked jurisdiction to decide the merits. The dismissal leaves the trial court decree in place unless the appellant pursues the correct discretionary-review procedure if timely available.