Court Opinion

ID: 9850089
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:52:04.576003+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:31.625094
License: Public Domain

Order of the Court.
Applicant filed this application for discretionary appeal seeking review of the trial court’s April 18, 2007 order entered in the parties’ underlying divorce action. Although the order is entitled a Final Judgment and Decree of Divorce, the court reserves in paragraphs 12 *165and 13 of its order the right to review the parties’ submissions regarding eligibility for and reimbursement of certain government benefits allegedly obtained improperly.
Although this Court clearly has subject matter jurisdiction over the appeal given that it was taken from a judgment and decree of divorce, see 1983 Ga. Const., Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. Ill (6), paragraphs 12 and 13 providing 90 days for action by the parties (the propriety of which action would be open to review by the trial court) make this appeal interlocutory in nature. See Carr v. Carr, 238 Ga. 197 (232 SE2d 69) (1977) (“Where a divorce is granted ... by an order which leaves other issues for decision in the trial court, it is an interlocutory, not a final, order”); see also Black v. Sturdivant, 131 Ga.App. 698 (206 SE2d 526) (1974) (order entering judgment against a defendant but reserving to the plaintiff a right to present evidence as to unliquidated damages leaves the case pending such that an appeal is premature). Therefore, the applicant was required to follow the interlocutory appeal procedures set out in OCGA § 5-6-34 (b). Because she failed to do so, this application must be and hereby is dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Hunstein, P. J., and Carley and Melton, JJ„ who dissent.