# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 4 A0 90 1 . I N THE I NTEREST OF N. O., et a l ., CHI LDREN (FATHER).

This ap p eal aris e s o u t o f a d e p e nd enc y p ro c eed ing bro u ght in J anu a ry 2021 w ith

resp ec t to a gro u p o f nine siblings, all o f w ho m are m ino rs. B ased o n ev id enc e

d isc ov ered d u ring the c o u rse o f the d ep end e nc y c a se, the mo ther and the b io lo gic al

f ather o f t h e f

iv e yo u ngest c hild ren (“ the f ather” ) w ere arrested and charged w ith

mu ltip le c o u nts o f c ru elty to c hild ren in the f irst degree. T h e p a r e n ts w ere

su bsequ ently r e l e ased o n bo nd in the c r iminal c ase. Eac h p arent’ s bo nd c o nd itio ns

requ ired

, inter alia, that the p arent “ hav e no c o ntac t w it h mino r c hild ren exc ep t as

allo w ed by the D iv isio n o f Family a nd Child ren Serv ic es [“ D FCS” ]. ” G w innett

Co u nty D FCS, in tu rn, p ro hibited bo th p arents f ro m hav ing any c o ntac t w ith any o f

the nine c hild r en.

I n Oc to b er 2023, the Gu ard ian A d Litem ( “ GA L ” ) f o r the child r e n f

iled a

p etitio n f o r an emergenc y hearing, asserting that in late Sep tember, the parents had

mad e a v id eo c all to the o ld est c hild

, N

. O. Giv e n that this co ntac t w ith the c hild

v io lated a c o nd itio n set by D FCS and the p arents’ resp ec tiv e c r iminal bo nd s , the GA L

so u ght a “ no c o ntac t” o rd er f ro m the j u venile c o u rt. Fo llo w ing a hearing, the j u v enile

c o u rt entered an o rd e r barring the p arents f ro m hav ing any c o ntac t w ith any o f the

n i n e m i n o r c hild ren. The f ather then filed this d irec t ap p eal f r o m the no c o ntac t

o rd er. 1 W e lac k j u risd ic tio n.

1 The mo ther, w ho is rep resented by sep arate c o u n s e l

, i s n o t a p a rty to this

ap p eal. February 06, 2024D irec t ap p eals generally may be tak en fro m “ [a]ll final j ud gments, t hat is to say,

w here the c ase is no lo nger p end ing in t he c o u rt belo w [. ]” OCGA § 5- 6- 34 ( a) (1 ). See

also OCGA § 1 5- 1 1 -35 (p ro v id ing f o r d irec t a p p eals fro m f

inal ju v enile c o u rt o rd ers).

Thu s, “an o r d er is f

i n a l a n d ap p ealable w hen it leav es no issu es remaining to be

reso lv ed

, c onstitu tes t he c o u rt’ s f inal ru ling o n the merits of t he ac tio n, and leav es the

p arties w ith no f

u rther rec o u r s e in the tri a l c o u rt. ” Ya nes v

. E s co b a r , 36 2 Ga. A p p

.

89 6

, 89 7 (87 0 SE2d 506 ) (2022)(p u nc tu ati o n o mitted ). H ere, the o rd er t he f ather

seek s to ap p eal is no t a f inal o r d e r bec au s e t he d ep end enc y c ase remains p end ing

belo w , as d o es the legitimatio n p etitio n the f a ther f iled w ith r esp ec t to the f iv e

yo u ngest c hild r en. To o b t ain immed iate r ev iew o f the trial c o u rt’ s o rd er, theref o re,

the father w as requ ired to f o llo w the interlo c u to ry ap p e al p ro c ed u res set f o rth in

OCGA § 5- 6 -34 (b), w hic h inc lu d e o btaining a c ertif ic ate o f immed iate rev iew f

ro m

the trial c o u rt. See I

s la m k h a n v

. K

ha n , 29 9 Ga. 548, 551 (2) (7 87 SE2d 731 ) (201 6 ).

The f ather’ s f ailu re t o f o llo w tho se p r o c ed u res d ep riv es u s o f j urisd ic tio n o v er this

ap p eal, w hic h is hereby D I SM I SSED

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a ls o f t h e S t a t e o f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O ffic e , A t la n t a ,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t ify t ha t t h e a b o v e is a t

r u e e x t r a c t fr o m

t h e m in u t e s o f t h e C o u r t o f A pp e a ls o f G e o r g ia

.

W it n e s s m y s ig n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a ffix e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r la s t a b o v e w r

it t e n

.

, C le r

k

. 02/06/2024