Opinion
A24A0084
08-10-2023
JEREMY K. DAY v. KRISTINA MARIE DAY MCCARTHNEY.
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
Jeremy K. Day and Kristina Marie Day McCarthney divorced in 2005. Day thereafter filed a petition for modification of child custody and child support. McCarthney counterclaimed for contempt, and in November 2021, the trial court entered an order finding Day in contempt for failing to pay child support and other costs related to the parties' child and ordering Day incarcerated until he purged the contempt. Upon the denial of his motion for new trial, Day filed both an application for discretionary review, which was denied, see Case No. A22D0411 (June 21, 2022), and a direct appeal, which was dismissed, see Case No. A22A1720 (July 22, 2022). Upon remittitur, the trial court issued an order on June 16, 2023, again ordering Day incarcerated in accordance with the November 2021 order. Day has filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction.
Appeals from "judgments or orders in divorce, alimony, and other domestic relations cases" including orders "holding or declining to hold persons in contempt" of such orders must be made by application for discretionary appeal. OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2). Here, to challenge the order finding him in contempt of his divorce decree or the subsequent incarceration order, Day was required to file an application for discretionary appeal pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2); Russo v. Manning, 252 Ga. 155, 155-156 (312 S.E.2d 319) (1984) (holding that order finding party in contempt of divorce decree and ordering him incarcerated was appealable only by application for discretionary appeal). "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). Day's failure to follow the proper appellate procedure deprives us of jurisdiction to consider this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.