# 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 2 D0 26 1 . TATYANA ELLI S et a l . v . KENNETH LEI GH SEAVER.

Tat y an a El l i s (“ W i fe”) an d Tro y El l i s (“ New Hu s b an d”) s eek d i s cret i o n ary

rev i ew o f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d en i al o f t h ei r m o t i o n t o recu s e i n t h i s d o m es t ic rel at i on s

cas e. W e, h o wev er, l ack ju ri s d i ct i o n

. W i fe an d Ken n et h Seav er (“ Hu s b an d ”) were d iv o rced i n 2 0 14. Th ereaft er, t h ey

fi led a n u m

b er of m o t i o n s , i n cl u d i n g W i fe’ s m o t i o n t o s e t a s i d e p art o f t h e d i v o rce

d ecree an d b o t h p art i es ’ m o t i o n s fo r co n t em p t an d fo r a m o d i fi cat io n o f cu s t o d y an d

ch i l d s u p p o rt

. In March 2 0 1 9

, t h e t ri al co u rt en t ered an o rd er d e c l i n i n g t o s et as i d e

t h e d ecree o r t o m o d i fy cu s to dy

, o rd eri n g W i fe to p ay ch i l d s u p p o rt

, fi n d i n g W i fe in

co n tem p t

, an d di rect i n g h er to p ay Hu s b an d ’ s at to rn ey fees

. W i fe fi l ed a d i s cret i o n ary

ap p li cat io n s eek i n g rev iew o f t h e o rd er’ s no n -cu s t o d y ru l i n g s , b u t we d en i ed t h e

ap p li cat io n

. See Cas e No

. A1 9D0 4 3 8 (M ay 1 5

, 2 01 9 ). W i fe al s o fi l ed a d i rect ap p eal

fro m t h e cu s t od y p o rt i o n o f t he o rd er. W e affi rm ed th e tri al c o u r t

. See Cas e No

. A2 0 A0 23 1 (Ap r. 2 9, 2 02 0 ).

Back i n t h e t ri al co u rt

, W i fe— wh o had s i n ce rem arri ed New Hu sb an d

— fi l ed

an “ o m ni b us m o t i o n ” th at

, am o n g o t h e r t h i n g s , s o u g ht t o s et as i d e t h e M arch 2 0 1 9

o rd er. N ew Hu s b an d fi l ed a s im i l ar o m n i b u s m o t i o n , as wel l as a m o t i o n t o i nt erv en e,

a n d b o t h W i fe an d New Hu s b an d fi led m o t i o ns t o recu s e b o t h t h e t ri al c o u r t j u d g e

an d t he en t i re Co b b J u d i ci al Ci rcu i t

. In Sep t em b er 2 0 2 1

, th e t ri al co u rt en t ered o rd ers

d en y i n g o r d i s m i s si n g al l o f t h es e m o t i o n s

. W i fe an d New Hu s ban d fi l ed an

ap p li cat io n fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal

, wh i ch we d e n i ed

. See Cas e No

. A2 2 D0 1 1 0
(No v. 9 , 2 0 2 1 ). March 14, 2022W i fe an d N ew H u s b a n d t h en fi l ed a m o t io n t o s et as i d e t h e Sep t em b er 2 0 2 1

o rd er d en y i n g t h ei r o m

n ib u s m o t i o n s

. 1 Th e t ri al co u rt d en i ed t h is m o ti o n , ru l i n g t h at

“ [n ] o ne o f t h e g ro u nd s s p eci fi cal l y s et o u t i n OCGA § 9 -1 1 -6 0 (d ) h av e b een s h o wn

t o ex i s t [.] ” W i fe an d New Hu s b an d al s o fi l ed an o t h er m o t i o n t o recu s e th e t ri al co u rt
ju d g e, al l eg i n g t h at t h e y h a v e a p en d i n g m an d am us act i o n ag ai n s t h er an d s h e h as

d em o n s t rat ed b i a s a g a i n s t t h em

. Th e t ri al co u rt al s o d en i ed t hi s m ot i o n. W i fe an d

New Hu s b an d n ow s eek d i s cret i o n ary rev i e w o f t h e o rd er den y i n g t h ei r m o t i o n to

recu s e. Th ey

d o n o t ch al l en g e t h e o rd er d en y i ng t h ei r l at es t m o t i o n t o s et as i d e.

W i fe an d New Hu s b an d ch aract eri ze th e recu s al or de r a s “ i n t erl o cu t ory .” If t h i s

i s accu rat e, th en W i fe an d New Hu s b an d were req u ired t o fi l e an ap p l i c a t i o n f o r

i n t erl o cu t o ry ap peal

, wh i ch t h ey hav e no t d on e. See El l i s v. S ta n f o r d

, 2 56 Ga. Ap p.

2 9 4

, 2 9 5 (2 ) (5 6 8 SE2 d 1 5 7 ) (2 0 0 2) (“ Den i al s o f m o t i o n s t o recu s e are i n t erl o cu t o ry

i n n at u r e. An ap p eal o f s u ch an o rd er req u i res co m pl i an ce wi t h t he i n t erl o cu t o ry

ap p eal p ro v i s i on s o f OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (b ).”).

Ho wev er, t he recu sal o rd er ap p ears t o be fi n al

, as W ife an d New Hu s b an d p o i nt

t o n o t h i n g p e n d i n g b e f

o re t h e t ri al co u rt i n t h e cas e b el o w

. See Na nce v. Ho u s t o n

Co u n t y Sch o o l D i s t

. , 3 5 9 Ga. Ap p

. 2 0 4

, 2 0 5 (8 5 7 SE2 d 97 ) (2 0 2 1) (an o rd er i s fi n al

wh en “ t h e cas e i s no l o n g er p en d i n g i n th e co u rt b el o w ”). Un der O CGA § 5 -6 -4 8 (b )
(3 ) an ap p eal wi l l be d i s m i s s ed “ [w] h ere t he q u es t i on s p res en t ed h av e b eco m e m o o t .”

If t h ere is n o t h i n g l eft fo r t h e t ri al co u rt t o ru l e up o n , t h en t h e recu s al i s s u e i s m o o t

. See Ca r l o ck v. Kma r t Co r p

. , 2 2 7 Ga. Ap p

. 3 5 6

, 3 6 1 (3 ) (a) (4 8 9 SE2 d 9 9 ) (1 9 9 7 ) (a

m at t er i s m o o t i f i t “ can n o t h av e an y pract i cal effect o n t he ex i s t i n g co n tro v ers y ”).

1 W i fe an d New Hu s b an d h av e n o t i n cl u d ed t h i s m o t i o n wi t h t h ei r ap p l i cat i o n

m at eri al s

.In s u m , t h e recu s al o rd er i s ei th er i n t e r l o c ut o ry , b ecau s e t h e cas e rem ai n s

p en di n g b el ow; o r m o o t

, becau s e i t do es n o t

. I n e i t h er ci rcu m s t an ce, we l ack
ju ri s d i ct i o n . Th i s ap p l i cat i o n i s t h erefo re DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y th a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

.
W i tn e s s m y s i g 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 f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 03/14/2022