From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burnett v. Coleman

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Feb 28, 1984
317 S.E.2d 546 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984)

Opinion

67444.

DECIDED FEBRUARY 28, 1984. REHEARING DENIED MARCH 20, 1984.

Visitation rights. Crisp Superior Court. Before Judge Forrester.

Bruce M. Hofstadter, for appellant.

James E. Turk, David E. Morgan III, for appellee.


Appellant brings a direct appeal from a judgment holding her in contempt of an order which granted appellee visitation rights to the parties' child. "Visitation privileges are, of course, part of custody. [Cits.]" Ledford v. Bowers, 248 Ga. 804, 805 ( 286 S.E.2d 293) (1982). Accordingly, it is clear that the instant case is subject to the provisions of OCGA § 5-6-35, because it is an appeal from a judgment holding appellant in contempt of a child custody order. OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2). As such, the instant case is not directly appealable and must be dismissed because of appellant's failure to follow the procedure necessary to secure a discretionary appeal. Godbold v. Godbold, 245 Ga. 121 ( 263 S.E.2d 440) (1980); Courson v. Ridley, 247 Ga. 171 ( 276 S.E.2d 45) (1981).

Appeal dismissed. Deen, P. J., and Banke, J. concur.

DECIDED FEBRUARY 28, 1984 — REHEARING DENIED MARCH 20, 1984 — CERT. APPLIED FOR.


Summaries of

Burnett v. Coleman

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Feb 28, 1984
317 S.E.2d 546 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984)
Case details for

Burnett v. Coleman

Case Details

Full title:BURNETT v. COLEMAN

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Feb 28, 1984

Citations

317 S.E.2d 546 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984)
170 Ga. App. 394

Citing Cases

Tuttle v. Stauffer

[Cits.]'" ( Burnett v. Coleman, 170 Ga. App. 394 ( 317 S.E.2d 546) (1984)), and grandparents seeking…

Moore v. Moore-McKinney

We note that, for purposes of OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2), as that statute was previously in effect, we considered…