Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
GRAY et al. v. SPRINGS.
William Terry Springs filed a petition for legitimation of Lana M. Gray Darby's (“the mother”) minor child, alleging “it would be in the best interest of his [child] that a pattern of regular visitation be established.” The mother denied the material allegations of this petition, asserted a claim for termination of Springs' parental rights, and the mother's husband, Gregory Scott Darby, filed a petition to adopt the minor child. After a hearing, the trial court entered an order granting Springs' petition for legitimization, denying the mother's claim for termination of Springs' parental rights and denying Gregory Scott Darby's adoption petition. The trial court reserved ruling on the issues of custody and visitation. The mother and Gregory Scott Darby filed this direct appeal. Held:
Springs has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal based on the mother's and Gregory Scott Darby's failure to obtain a certificate of immediate review from the trial court's interlocutory order as required by OCGA § 5-6-34(b).
“ ‘[A] party seeking appellate review from an interlocutory order must follow the interlocutory-application subsection, OCGA § 5-6-34(b), seek a certificate of immediate review from the trial court, and comply with the time limitations therein.’ Scruggs [v. Ga. Dept. of Human Resources, 261 Ga. 587, 589, 408 S.E.2d 103 ].” Bailey v. Bailey, 266 Ga. 832, 833, 471 S.E.2d 213. The trial court's order in the case sub judice is interlocutory because it reserves ruling on the issues of custody and visitation. However, neither the mother nor Gregory Scott Darby obtained a certificate of immediate review from the trial court as required by OCGA § 5-6-34(b). This appeal must therefore be dismissed as premature. See Bailey v. Bailey, 266 Ga. 832, 833, 471 S.E.2d 213, supra.
Appeal dismissed.
McMURRAY, Presiding Judge.
RUFFIN, J., and HAROLD R. BANKE, Senior Appellate Judge, concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. A96A2455.
Decided: January 30, 1997
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)