Court Opinion

ID: 9589826
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:49:04.911468+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:05:11.406882
License: Public Domain

Nichols, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
I dissent from the judgment of affirmance in this case. The trial court erroneously concluded that it had *529jurisdiction to modify its previously entered final custody award. Taylor v. Taylor, 231 Ga. 742, 743 (204 SE2d 129) (1974).
The recent Act of the General Assembly, Ga. L. 1976, p. 247 (Code Ann. § 74-112), providing for visitation rights to grandparents, does not aid the appellees. This statute provides that the court may grant visitation rights to grandparents when it has before it any question regarding custody or guardianship of any minor child. The jurisdiction must be independent of any visitation rights sought.
Ga. L. 1976, pp. 1050, 1052, adding a paragraph to Code § 50-121, alleviating the necessity of showing a change in conditions before bringing a petition to modify visitation rights, provides:"... on the motion of any party or on the motion of the court that portion of the judgment effecting visitation rights between the parties and their minor children ...” (Emphasis supplied.) The amendment providing for modification of visitation rights "between the parties and their minor children” is not applicable to third parties seeking visitation rights.
I am authorized to state that Justice Gunter and Justice Ingram join in this dissent.