Court Opinion

ID: 9623838
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 06:44:27.690387+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:05:35.275608
License: Public Domain

Andrews, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
While I concur fully in the reversal of Case No. A91A0324, and Divisions 1 through 4, 5 (a) (1), 5 (b), and 6 as they also relate to Case No. A91A0323, I must respectfully dissent as to Division 5 (a) (2) requiring the reversal of Case No. A91A0323.
The point on which the majority opinion relies was not enumer*528ated as error or argued by Wilson, leaving this court without jurisdiction to consider that argument. Dennis v. Malt, 196 Ga. App. 263, 265 (2) (395 SE2d 894) (1990). Further, the judgment entered against Norfolk in favor of the child states that the court reviewed the settlement and independently concluded that the damages were “just and fair”and in the child’s best interest. This element supplies evidence of the reasonableness of the settlement for purposes of summary judgment, and defeats the argument made, which was that it was arbitrary.
Decided July 16, 1991.
Tisinger, Tisinger, Vance & Greer, Thomas E. Greer, Michele R. Smith, for appellant.
Shaw, Maddox, Graham, Monk & Harris, James D. Maddox, for appellee.
I am authorized to state that Chief Judge Sognier, Presiding Judge Banke and Presiding Judge Birdsong join in this opinion.