From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bonds v. Bonds

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Dec 9, 1999
241 Ga. App. 378 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999)

Summary

affirming trial court’s modification of custody where there was "no transcript of the proceedings or statutorily authorized substitute"

Summary of this case from In re T. D.

Opinion

A99A1713.

DECIDED: DECEMBER 9, 1999.

Child custody. Bibb Superior Court. Before Judge Christian.

Josephine B. Jones, for appellant.

Lawson Sippel, John A. Lawson, for appellee.


Brendalyn Bonds filed an application for discretionary appeal from an order of the trial court modifying child custody. We granted her application primarily to address her argument that the trial court erred in failing to include in its order any findings of fact. This enumeration, as well as others raised, is without merit.

1. The trial court did not err in failing to make specific findings of fact. Under former law, it was mandatory in a contested child custody case for the trial judge to include findings of fact in its final order. See Haralson v. Moore, 236 Ga. 131, 133(3) ( 223 S.E.2d 107) (1976); Githens v. Githens, 234 Ga. 715 ( 217 S.E.2d 291) (1975); Jordan v. Jordan, 179 Ga. App. 155, 157(1) ( 345 S.E.2d 675) (1986). In fact, where the trial judge neglected to make such findings, we remanded the case for the entry of such findings. See Haralson, supra; Githens, supra.

In 1987, however, the legislature amended OCGA § 9-11-52(a). Under the amended statute, entry of findings of fact became mandatory only upon request by a party. OCGA § 9-11-52 (a); Poor v. Leader Fed. Bank, 221 Ga. App. 889(1) ( 473 S.E.2d 563) (1996); Doe v. Chambers, 188 Ga. App. 879, 881(2) ( 374 S.E.2d 758) (1998). The record in this case does not show that any party requested that the trial court enter findings of fact. Therefore, the failure to do so was not error. See Burks v. First Union Mortgage, 209 Ga. App. 41(1) ( 432 S.E.2d 822) (1993); Doe, supra.

2. There being no transcript of the proceedings or statutorily-authorized substitute, we must presume that the evidence supported the trial court's ruling. Marshall v. SDA, Inc., 234 Ga. App. 312, 313(3) ( 506 S.E.2d 661) (1998); Goodman v. Lake Buckhorn c., Inc., 224 Ga. App. 765(3) ( 481 S.E.2d 882) (1997). Accordingly, the remaining enumerations are without merit.

Judgment affirmed. McMurray, P.J., and Phipps, J., concur.


DECIDED DECEMBER 9, 1999.


Summaries of

Bonds v. Bonds

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Dec 9, 1999
241 Ga. App. 378 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999)

affirming trial court’s modification of custody where there was "no transcript of the proceedings or statutorily authorized substitute"

Summary of this case from In re T. D.
Case details for

Bonds v. Bonds

Case Details

Full title:BONDS v. BONDS

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Dec 9, 1999

Citations

241 Ga. App. 378 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999)
527 S.E.2d 215

Citing Cases

Weickert v. Weickert

Furthermore, findings of fact to support custody modification are not required in the absence of a request by…

Warren v. Smith

The Supreme Court of Georgia has held that, for the purposes of statutory construction, the word “shall” is…