THI RD DI VI SI ON

ELLI NGTON, P. J.

, DI LLA RD and M C FA DDEN, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s /

Jul y 8, 2015



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 5 A1 22 3 . PARKER v . STONE et al

.

E LLI N G T O N , Pres i d i n g J ud g e.

Th e Su p eri o r Co u rt o f Do u gl as Co u n t y en t ered a d ecree of ad o p t i o n of a ch i l d,

ei g h t -y ear-o l d A. S., b y Ri ch ard an d An i t a St o ne. J erem i Park er ap peal s

, co n t en d i n g

t h at t h e s u p eri o r co u rt l ack ed ju ri s d i ct i o n an d t h erefo re erred i n d en y i n g h i s m o t i o n

t o d is m i s s t h e St o n es ’ am en ded p e t i t i o n to ad o pt A. S. Fo r t h e reas o n s ex p l ai n ed

b el o w, we affi rm

. 1

1 W e n o t e t h at t h e St o n es fi l ed a m o t i o n t o q u as h al l p lead i n g s fi l ed b y Park er.

Th e s up eri o r co u rt g ran t ed t h e m ot i o n , effect i v el y d i s m i s s i n g Park er fro m

t h e cas e,

an d g ran t ed t h e ad o p t i o n p et i t i o n o n Decem b er 2 2

, 2 0 0 9

. In an earl ier a p p eal

, we

v acat ed t h e d ecree an d rev ers ed

, h o l d i n g t h at t h e su p eri o r co u rt erred i n gran t i n g t h e

m o ti o n t o q u as h Park e r ’s p l ead i n g s wi t h o u t d et erm i ni n g wh et her h e i s a b l o o d

r e l a t i v e o f A. S, b ecau s e, wh en s o m eo n e s eek s t o ad o p t a ch i l d wh o h as n o l eg al

fat h er o r l eg al m o t her l i vi ng

, OCGA § 1 9 -8 -1 5 g iv es t h e p ri v i l eg e t o fi l e o b ject i on s

t o t h e pet i t i o n fo r ad o p t i o n o f th e ch i l d t o an y p ers o n rel at ed to th e c h i l d b y b l o o d

. Pa r ker v. S t o n e

, 3 0 6 Ga. Ap p . 6 3 6 , 6 3 7 -6 38 (1 ) (7 0 2 SE2 d 6 36 ) (2 0 1 0 ).Th e reco rd s h o ws t h at A. S. was b o rn o n J u l y 23

, 2 00 6

, a n d p l a ced wi t h t h e

St o n es o n J u l y 2 8

, 2 0 0 6

. O n M ay 2 9

, 2 0 0 7

, t h e Geo rg i a Dep ar t m e n t o f Hu m an

Res ou rces b y an d t h ro u gh t h e Do u g l as Co u n t y Dep art m en t o f Fam i l y

an d Ch i l d ren

Serv i ces (“ t h e D ep art m en t ”), fi l ed i n t h e J u ven i l e Co u rt o f D o u g l as Co u n t y a p et i t i o n

t o t erm i n at e t h e paren t al i nt eres t s o f S. S. (A. S.’ s m o t h er) an d C

. W. ( A

. S

. ’s

b i o l o g i cal an d p u tat i v e fat h er an d Park er’ s hal f-b ro t her). O n M ay 22

, 2 0 0 8 (n u n c p ro

t u n c t o Sep t em

b er 1 7

, 2 0 0 7 ), t h e ju v en i l e co u rt en t ered an o rd er t erm i n at i ng S. S.’ s

p aren t al ri g h t s ; t h e ju v en i l e co u rt res erv ed t h e i s s u e o f C. W

. ’ s p aren tal ri g h t s

.

On M ay 2 7

, 20 0 8

, th e St o n es fi l ed i n th e s u peri o r co u rt t h e i n s t an t p et i t i o n to

ad o pt A

. S., al l eg i n g

, in t er al i a, t h at o n May 2 2

, 2 0 0 8, C

. W. h a d s urren d ered h i s

p are n tal ri g h t s t o Park er. On J u l y 11

, 2 0 0 8

, as A. S.’ s “ bi o l o g i cal u n cl e,” Park er

res p o n d e d t o t h e St o nes ’ p et it i o n

. Park er ad m i t ted t h at C. W

. h ad s urren d ered h i s

p aren t al ri g h t s t o Park er o n M ay 2 2

, 2 00 8

. He o b j ect ed to t h e S t o n es ’ ad o p t i o n

p et i t i o n

, d en y in g t h at th e ad o pt i o n was i n A. S. ’s b e s t i n t e res t s

. 2 He lat er fi l ed a

m o ti o n to d i sm i s s t h e ad o p t i on p et i t i o n. Aft er a h e a ri n g

, t h e s u p eri o r co u rt d en i ed

Park er’ s m o t i o n t o d is m i s s t h e St o n es ’ pet i t i on

, g ran t ed t h e p et i t i o n

, an d en t ered a

2 See Pa r ker v. S t o n e

, 30 6 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 3 6

, n

. 1 (d eem in g Park er’ s res p o n s i v e

p l ead i n g t o b e an o b

ject i o n p urs u an t t o OCGA § 19 -8 -1 5 t o th e St o nes ’ ad o p t i o n

p et i t i o n ).

2d ecree o f a d o p t i o n

. In t h e d ecree, t h e s u p eri o r co u rt s t at ed t h at t h e ri g h t s an d

o b l i g at i o ns o f C. W

., A. S’ s “ p u t at iv e b i ol o g i cal fat h er b u t no t leg al fat h er[,]

. . . are

p erm an en t l y t erm i n at ed bas ed up o n t h e d i s m i s sal [o n J u n e 2 5

, 2 0 0 9 ,] o f [t h e] Pet i t i o n

fo r Leg i t im at i o n ” C. W . h ad fi l ed i n t he ju v en i l e co u rt

. 3

1

. Befo re co n s id eri n g t he m eri t s o f Park er’ s ap p eal

, we w i ll ad d res s t h e St o n es ’

m o ti o n to d i sm i s s (f

i l e d M a r c h 1 9

, 2 0 1 5 ). Th e St o n es arg u e t h at Park er was n o t a

p art y to t h e ad o p t i o n p ro ceed i n g i n t h e s u p eri o r co u rt an d

, th erefo re, h e l ack s

s t an d i n g p u rs u an t t o O CGA § 5 -6 -3 3 t o fi l e an ap peal fro m t h e d ecree. Gen eral l y

, t h at

3 Un d er OCGA § 1 9 -8 -1 2 (f) (3 ):

[a] b i o l o g i cal fat h er wh o i s n o t th e l eg al fat h er l o s es al l ri g h t s t o th e

ch i l d an d t he co u rt s h al l en t er an o r d e r t erm i n at i n g al l s u ch fat h er’ s

ri gh ts t o t he ch i l d an d s u ch fat h er m ay n o t t h ereaft er o b ject to th e

ad o p t i o n an d i s n o t en ti t l ed t o recei v e fu rt h e r n o t i ce o f t h e ad o pt i on i f

wi t h in 3 0 d ay s fro m h i s recei pt o f t h e n o t i ce pro v i ded fo r i n s u b s ect i o n

(b ) o f t h i s Co d e s ect i o n h e:

(1 ) Do es no t fi l e a l eg it i m at io n p et it io n an d g iv e n o ti ce as

req u ired i n s u b s ect i o n (e) o f t h i s Co d e s ect i o n ;

(2 ) Fi l es a leg i t i m at i o n p et it i on wh ich is s u bs eq u en t l y

d is m i s s ed fo r fai l u re t o p ro s ecu t e; o r

(3 ) Fi l es a l eg it i m at i o n p et i t i o n an d t he act i o n i s

s u b s eq u en t l y co n cl u d ed wi t h o u t a co urt o rd er decl ari n g a

fi n d in g t h at h e i s t h e fat h er o f t h e ch i l d

. See OCGA § 1 9 -8

- 1 (1 ) (“ ‘ Bi o l o g i cal fat h er’ m ean s t h e m al e wh o i m p reg n at ed t h e

b i o l o g i cal m o th er res u l t i n g i n t h e b i rt h of t he ch i ld .”); (6 ) ( “ L e g a l fat h er” m ean s a

m al e wh o has l eg al l y ad o p ted a ch i l d ; was m arri ed t o t h e bi o l o g i c a l m o t h er u n d er

s p eci fi ed ci rcu m s tan ces ; o r h as l eg i t i m at ed t h e ch i l d an d wh o h as n o t s u rren d ered o r

h ad t erm i n at ed h i s ri g ht s t o t h e ch i l d .).

3Co d e s ect i o n l i m i ts th e ri g ht t o ap p eal t o an y “ p art y ” i n a ci v i l cas e. 4 Al t h o u g h OCGA

§ 19 -8 -1 5 co n ferred a ri g h t o n Park e r “ t o f i l e o b j ect i o n s t o t h e p et i t i o n fo r

a d o p t i o n [,] ” th e St o n es co n t en d, fi l i n g o b ject i o n s d i d n o t m ak e Park er a p art y wi t h

a ri g h t t o ap peal u n der OCGA § 5 -6 -3 3

.

OCGA § 1 9 -8 -1 5 p ro v id es i n pert i n en t p art : “ If [a] ch i l d s o ug h t t o be ad o p t ed

h as n o l eg al fat her o r l eg al m ot h er l iv i ng

, i t s h al l b e t h e pri v i l eg e o f an y p ers o n

rel at ed by b l oo d t o t h e ch il d to fi l e o b ject i o n s t o th e p et i ti o n fo r ad o p t i o n.” Th u s

, by

i t s p l ai n t erm s, OCGA § 1 9 -8 -1 5 g i v es b l oo d rel at iv es o f a ch i l d t h e ri gh t

, wh en t h e

s p eci fi ed cri t eri a are m et , t o p art i ci pat e i n ad o p ti o n p ro ceed i n g s t o a cert ai n ex t en t

,

t h at is

, b y fi li n g o bject i o n s

, an d t he s t at u t e i n h eren tl y req u i res t h e t ri al co u rt to

co n si d er al l pro perl y fi l ed o b ject i o n s

. 5 A tri al co u rt ’ s deci s i o n to gran t a p et i t i o n to

4 “ E it h er p art y i n an y ci v i l cas e an d t h e d efen d an t i n an y cri m i n al pro ceed i n g

i n t h e s u p eri o r, s t at e, o r ci t y co u rt s m ay ap p eal fro m an y s en t en ce, ju d g m en t

, d eci s i o n

, o r d ecree o f t h e co urt

, o r o f t he j u dg e t h ereo f in an y m at t er h eard at

ch am b ers .” OCGA § 5 -6 -3 3 (a) (1 ). See al so OCGA § 5 -6 -3 7 ( “ A l l p art i es t o t h e

p ro ceed in g s i n t h e l o wer co u rt s h al l b e p art i es o n ap p eal an d s h al l b e s erv ed wi t h a

co p y o f t h e n o t i ce o f ap p eal in t h e m an ner p res cri b ed b y [ t h e Ap p el l at e Pract i ce

Act ] .”).

5 Co n t rary t o t h e S t o n e s ’ co nt en t i o n

, t h i s cas e i s n o t co n t ro l l ed b y Lo ckey v.

Ben net t

, 2 4 4 Ga. 3 39 (2 6 0 SE2 d 5 6 ) (1 9 7 9 ). In t h at cas e, t h e Su prem e Co u r t o f

Geo rg i a d eci d ed i n o n e ap p eal t h at t he ap p el lan t s h ad no s t at u t o r y ri g h t t o fi l e

o b ject i on s to an ad o p t i on p et i ti on u n d er th e p red eces s or to OCGA § 19 -8 -1 5

. 2 4 4 Ga.

at 3 4 0 (1 ). On ce i t h ad b een ju d i ci al l y d et erm i n ed an d affi rm ed o n ap p eal t h at t h ey

4ad o pt a ch i l d o v er t he o b j ect i o n s o f a b l oo d rel at i v e wh o h as a s t at u t ory ri gh t t o l o d g e

o b ject i on s i s n eces s ari ly an ad v ers e d eci s io n as t o t h at p e r s o n

. We c o n cl u d e t h at a

ri gh t t o ap p el l at e rev i ew o f s uch an ad vers e d eci si o n fl o w s f r o m t h e s t at u t o ry ri g ht

t o p art ici p at e i n t h e p ro ceed i ng s i n t he t ri al co urt

. 6

M o reo v e r

, ev en i f t h i s were no t s o as a g en eral m at t er, we co n cl u d e t h at in

t h es e p ro ceed i n g s s p e c i f i cal l y Park er i s a p art y an d h as s tan d i n g t o ap p eal

. Th e

St o n es s erv ed h i m wi t h a s um m o n s

, an d h e fi led a res p o n s e t o t h ei r p et i t i o n as

d i rect ed b y t h e s u m

m o n s. Th e t ri al co u rt ord ered Park er t o u n d erg o a p sy ch o l o g i cal

l ack ed st an d i ng to fi l e o b

ject i o ns t o t h e ad o p t i o n p et i t i o n

, it fo ll o wed t h at t h ey l ack ed

s t an d i n g t o p u rs u e i n a s ep arat e ap p eal an y ch al l en g e t o th e ad o p ti o n d ecree t h at

fo l l o w ed

. 2 4 4 Ga. at 3 40 (2 ). See Ech o l s v. Co ch r a n

, 21 4 Ga. A p p

. 3 4 8 (4 4 7 SE2 d

7 0 0 ) (1 9 9 4 ).

6 See Ech ol

s v. Co ch r a n

, 2 1 4 G a

. A p p

. at 3 4 8 (ad d res s i n g o n t h e m eri t s an

ap p eal fi l ed b y b l oo d rel at i v es o f a ch i l d s ou g h t t o b e ad o p t ed

, wh ere t h e ch i l d h ad

n o l eg al fat h er o r l eg al m o t h er l i v i n g

, fro m an o rd er d ecl ari n g t h at t h e ap p el l an t s

l ack ed s t an d i n g t o fi l e o b ject io n s t o t h e ad o p t i o n p et i t io n ); s ee al s o S t a t e Ba r of

Geo rg i a v. Bea z l ey

, 2 5 6 Ga. 5 6 1

, 5 6 3 (1 ) (b ) (3 5 0 SE2 d 4 22 ) (1 9 8 6 ) (“ T h e t erm

‘ part y ’ t o an act io n i n cl u d es al l wh o are d i rect l y i n teres t ed i n t h e s u b ject m at t er, an d

wh o h av e a ri g h t t o m ak e d efen s e, co n t ro l t h e p l ead i n g s

, ex am i n e an d cro s s -ex am i n e

wi t n es s es

, an d ap p eal fro m t h e ju d g m en t .”) (ci t a t i o n s o m i t ted ); Geo r g i a Mu s i c

Op er a t o r s As s n

. v. Fu l to n Co u n t

y

, 1 8 4 Ga. 3 4 8

, 3 49 -3 5 0 (1 ), (2 ) (1 9 1 SE 1 1 7 ) (1 9 3 7 )

(“ [A] p art y i s ag g ri ev ed b y a ju d g m en t or decree wh e n i t o p erat es o n h i s ri g h t s o f

p ro p ert y

, o r b ears d i r e c t l y u p o n h i s i n teres t .” On l y a p art y wh o i s ag gri ev ed b y a

ju d g m en t h as a l eg al ri g h t t o ex cep t t h eret o as h av i n g “ ju s t cau s e” t o co m

p l ai n o f t h e

ju d g m en t .) (ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ); see g en eral l y Ch ri s to p h er J

. M cFad den et al

., Ga . Ap

p el l a t e Pr a ct i ce , § 1 6 .1 (u p d at ed No v em b er 2 0 1 4 ).

5ex am i n at i o n an d s u b m it t o a h o m e ev al u at i o n

. He fi l ed p l ead i n g s

, wh i ch th e St o n es

s o u g ht t o q u as h an d wh i ch we ru l ed were q u as h ed i n erro r. Pa r ker v. St o n e

, 3 0 6 Ga.

Ap p

. at 63 7 -6 3 8 (1 ). In th e earl i er ap p eal

, we h el d t h at t h e reco rd es t ab l i s h es t h at A.

S. h as n o l eg al fat h er o r l eg al m o t h er l i v i n g an d t h at

, as a res u l t

, Park er h as s t an d i n g

u n d er OCGA § 1 9 -8 -1 5 t o fi le o b ject i o n s t o t h e St o n es ’ p et i t i o n

, p ro v i d ed th at h e i s

a b l o o d rel at i v e. Id

. J us t as Park er h ad s t an d in g to ap p eal t he su p eri o r co u rt ’ s earl i er

d ecree an d i t s ru l i n g d i s m i ss i n g h i s o b ject i o n s t o t h e ad o p t i o n an d h is o t h er p l ead i n g s

,

h e has s t an d in g to ap peal fro m t h e i ns t an t d ecree en t ered u p o n co ns i d erat i o n o f h i s

o b ject i on s t o th e ad o p t i o n an d t h e ev i d en ce i n s u p p o rt o f th e St o n e s ’ p e t i t i o n

. Th e

St o n es ’ m o t i o n t o d i s m is s i s h ereb y d en i ed

. 7

2

. Tu rn i ng t o Park er’ s cl ai m s o n ap peal

, h e co n t en d s t h at

, b ecau s e t h e ju v en i l e

co u rt fi rs t ex erci s ed i t s ju ri s d i ct i o n t o t erm i nat e t h e p aren t al ri g ht s o f t h e bi o l o g i cal

7 See al s o S t a t e Ba r o

f Geo r g i a v. Bea z l ey

, 2 5 6 G a. at 5 6 3 (1 ) (b ) (W h ere an

at t o rn ey fi l ed an act i o n s t y l ed “ In Re” t h e at t o rn ey ’ s n am e, wi th o ut m ak i n g t h e St at e

B a r o f Geo rg i a a p art y t o t h e act i on

, t h e St at e Bar was n o n et h el es s a p art y t o t h e

act i on cap ab l e o f i n

ject i n g t h e res j u d icat a d o ct ri n e. Th e Su p rem e C o u r t n o t ed t h at

t h e St at e Bar p art i ci p at ed in t he act i o n b y th e l o wer co u rt ’ s i n v i t at i o n

, b ecau s e o f t h e

S t a t e Bar’ s ex t en s i v e p as t i n vo l v em en t wi t h t h e cas e an d it s p o s s es s io n o f c e r t a i n

d o cu m en t s an d t ran s cri p t s fro m p rev i o u s l i t i g at i o n ; t h e St at e Bar fi l ed an an s wer,

res p o n s es t o t h e at t o rn ey ’ s m ot io n s an d m o t i o n s o f i t s o w n ; i t was o rd ered by ru l e n i s i

t o ap p ear at a h eari ng an d s h o w cau s e wh y t h e at t orn ey ’ s m o ti o n to s et as id e s h o u ld

n o t b e g ran t ed ; i t in t ro d u ced ex h i b i t s i nt o ev id e n ce; i t p u rs u ed an ap p eal ; an d i t

o t h erwi s e act ed an d was t reat ed as a p art y .).

6p aren t s

, t h e s up eri o r co u rt d i d n o t h av e ju ri s d ict i on t o en t er an ad o pt i o n d ecree t h at

t erm i n at ed t h e p aren t al ri g h t s o f t h e b i ol o g i cal fat h er. Park er co n t en d s t hat t h e t ri al

co u rt fai l ed t o fo l l o w t h e h o ld i n g o f In t h e In t er es t of J. C. W

. , 3 1 5 Ga. Ap p. 5 6 6 (7 2 7

SE2 d 1 2 7) (2 0 1 2), an d erred i n ex erci s i n g ju ri s d i ct i o n.

“ Th e d o ct ri n e o f p ri ori ty ju ri s d i ct i o n p ro v i d es t hat [,] wh ere d i fferen t t ri b u n al s

h av e co n cu rren t ju ri s d ict i o n ov er a m at t er, th e fi rs t co urt t o ex erci s e ju ri s d i ct i o n wi l l

ret ai n i t .” (Ci t at i on an d fo o t n o t e o m i t t ed .) S t a n f iel d v. A l i z o t a

, 2 9 4 Ga. 8 1 3, 8 1 5 (7 5 6

SE2 d 5 26 ) ( 2 0 1 4 ). 8 Fo r ex am p l e, b ecau se ju v en i l e co u rt s an d s u p eri o r co u rt s h av e

co n cu rren t ju ri s di ct i o n o v er t erm i n at i o n o f p aren t al ri g h t s

, t h e fi r s t co urt t ak i n g

ju ri s d i ct i o n ov er su ch a m at ter ret ai n s ju ri s d i ct i on

. In t h e In ter es t o f J. C. W

. , 3 1 5 Ga.

Ap p

. at 5 7 2 (1 ). A s w e e x p l ai n ed

, t he p o li cy b eh i n d t h e d o ct ri n e o f p ri o ri t y

ju ri s d i c t i o n i s t o red u ce l it i g at i o n

, b y av o i d i ng d u p l i cat i v e su i t s

, an d t o av o id

i n co n s i s t en t , co m

p et i n g ru l i n g s o n an i s s u e. Id

.

In t h i s cas e, t h e ju ven i l e co u rt an d t h e s u p eri o r co urt p o ten t i al l y h ad co n cu rren t

ju ri s d i ct i o n wi t h res p ect t o t h e i s s u e o f t erm i n at io n of p aren t al ri g h t s

, an d a p et i t i o n

fo r t erm i nat i o n o f t h e p aren t al ri g ht s h ad b e e n fi l ed i n t h e ju v en il e co u rt b efo re t h e

8 See OCGA § 2 3

- 1

- 5 (“ W h ere l aw an d eq u i t y h av e co n cu rren t ju ri s d i ct i o n,

wh i ch ev er fi rs t t ak es ju ri s d i ct i o n s h al l ret ai n i t , u n l es s a g o o d reas o n s h al l b e g i v en

fo r t h e i nt erferen ce o f eq u i ty .”).

7St o n es fi l ed t h ei r ad o p t i o n pet i t i o n i n t h e s u p eri o r co u rt

. It i s u n d i s p u t ed , h o wev er,

t h at t h e ju v en i l e co u rt n ev er is s u ed a ru l i n g reg ard i n g t h e p aren t al ri g ht s o f A. S.’ s

b i o l o g i cal fat h er, C. W

., b ecau s e C. W . fi l ed a p et i t i o n fo r l eg i ti m at i o n an d t h at t h e

ju v en i l e co u rt l at er d i s m i s s ed t h e p et i t i o n fo r l eg i t i m at i o n wi t h o u t d ecl ari n g t h at C.

W

. i s A. S.’ s l eg al fat h er. W h en t h e s u p eri o r co u rt co n s i d ered th e St on es ’ ad o p t i o n

p et i t i o n

, t h e p ro ceed i n g i n t he ju v en i l e co u rt h ad l on g s i nce en d ed

, an d t h erefo re t h ere

was n o p ro b l em o f o v erl ap p i n g ju ri sd i ct io n o r co m p et in g

, i n co n s i s t en t ru l i n g s

. 9

Fu rt h erm o re, b ecau s e, at t h e t i m e o f t h e fi n al h eari n g an d ru l i n g o n t h e St o n es ’

ad o pt i o n p et i t i o n

, C. W

. was a b i o l o g i cal fat h er w h o h ad fai l ed t o tak e an y o f t h e

act i on s t o acq u i re t h e ri g h t s o f a leg al fat h er t o o bject t o a d o p t i o n pro ceed i n g s

,

OCGA § 1 9 -8 -1 2 (f) 1 0 req u i red t h e s u p eri o r co u rt t o en t er an o rd er term i n at i n g h i s

9 See Gr i f f i n v. St a t e

, 2 66 Ga. 1 1 5 (4 6 4 SE2 d 3 71 ) (1 9 9 5 ) (“ W h ere t w o o r m o re

co u rt s h av e co n cu rren t ju ri s d i ct i o n o f t h e s am e o ffen s e, th e co u rt w h i ch fi rs t acq u i res

ju ri s d i ct i o n o f t h e p ro s ecu t i o n ret ai n s i t t o t h e ex cl u s i o n o f o t h ers wh i l e t ha t ca s e i s

p en di n g

, t hereb y p reem

p ti n g ju ri s d i ct io n fo r al l o f f e n s e s ori g i n at i n g i n t h e s am e

co u rs e o f cri m in al co n d u ct .”) (ci t at i on s o m i t t ed ; em p h as i s s u p p l i ed ).

1 0 See fo o t n o t e 3 , s up ra.

8p aren t al ri g h t s

. 1 1 Park er’ s arg um en t p res en t s n o b as i s fo r rev ers i ng t h e s u p eri o r

co u rt ’ s ad o p ti o n d ecree. 1 2

3

. Th e St o n e s ’ m o t i o n p u rs u an t t o Co u rt o f Ap p eal s Ru l e 15 (b ) t o im p o s e a

p en al t y fo r fri v o l ou s ap p eal i s h ereb y d en ied

.

Ju d g men t af f i r med

. McFa d

d en

, J., co ncu rs

. D i l l a rd

, J., co n cu r

s f u l l y in

Di vi s i o n s 1 a n d 3 , a n d

i n j u d g men t o n l y i n Di vi s io n 2

.

1 1 See In t h e In t e r e s t o

f V. B

. L.

, 3 0 6 Ga. Ap p

. 7 0 9

, 7 1 2 (1 ) (7 0 3 SE2 d 1 2 7 )

(2 0 1 0); S mi t h v. S o li g o n , 2 5 4 Ga. Ap p . 1 7 2, 1 7 4 -1 7 5 (3 ) (5 6 1 SE2 d 8 5 0 ) (2 0 0 2 ).

1 2 Co m p are In t h e In t er es t o

f J. C. W

. , ci t ed b y Park er. In t h a t c a s e, t h e St at e

fi led a p et i t i o n s eek in g t erm i n at i o n o f a m o t h er’ s p aren t al ri g h ts t o h er ch i ld ren i n t h e

ju v en i l e co u rt

. I d

. a t 5 6 8

. W h i l e t h e j u v en i l e co u rt p ro ceed i n g was p en d i n g

, t h e

ch i l d ren ’ s fo s t er p aren ts fi l ed a p et i t i o n fo r ad o p t io n t hat al s o s o u g h t t erm i nat i o n o f

t h e m o th er’ s p aren t al ri g h ts

. Id

. at 57 0 -5 7 1. Th e j u v e n i l e co u rt is su ed an o rd er

d en y i n g t h e p et i ti o n fo r t erm i n at i o n o f p aren t al ri gh t s

, fi n d i n g t h at t erm i n at i o n was

n o t i n t he ch i l d ren ’ s b es t i n t eres t s . Id . at 5 7 0

. Th ereaft er, t h e s u peri o r co u rt g ran t ed

t h e ad op t i o n p et i t i on an d t erm i n at ed t h e m o t h er’ s p aren t al ri g h ts

. I d

. a t 5 7 1

. On

ap p eal

, we v acat ed th e s u p eri o r co u rt ’ s o rd er term i n at i n g th e m o t her’ s p aren t al ri g ht s

. Id . at 5 7 1 -5 7 2 (1 ).

9A1 5 A1 22 3 . PARKER v . STONE et al

.

D I LLA R D , J u dg e, co n cu rri n g s p eci al l y

.

I co n cu r fu l l y as t o Di v is i o ns 1 an d 3 o f t h e m ajo ri t y ’ s op i ni o n

. I co n cu r in

ju d g m en t o n l y as t o Di v i s i o n 2 b ecau s e I d o n o t ag ree wi t h al l t h at is s ai d i n t h at

d i v i s i on o f t h e m ajo ri t y o p i n io n

. Th u s

, th e m ajo ri t y ’ s o p i ni o n i n Di v i s i o n 2 d eci d es

o n l y t h e i s s u es p res en t ed i n t h at d i v i s i o n an d m ay no t b e ci t ed as b i n d in g p reced en t

i n fu t u re cas es

. S

ee Co u rt o f Ap p eal s Ru le 3 3 (a).