Kasia Ford v. Jeffrey Ford
Kasia Ford v. Jeffrey Ford
Opinion
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia ATLANTA,__________________ March 26, 2013 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order: A13D0272. KASIA FORD v. JEFFREY FORD.
Jeffrey Ford and Kasia Ford were divorced in December of 2007. Jeffrey Ford filed a petition for change of custody and contempt against his ex-wife, and the trial court issued an order in which it denied a change in custody, modified Kasia Ford’s visitation schedule, found her in contempt for failure to comply with the child support provisions of the divorce decree, and increased her child support to include arrearage payments. Kasia Ford filed a motion for reconsideration, which the trial court denied.
Kasia Ford then filed this application for discretionary appeal.
The issues in this case arise out of the child support and custody provisions of a divorce decree. Although the Court of Appeals may review cases relating solely to child custody, the Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction over “[a]ll divorce and alimony cases.” Georgia Constitution of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III (6). In Georgia, child support is a form of alimony. Additionally, because Jeffrey Ford’s action was based on an alleged violation of the parties’ divorce decree, appellate jurisdiction lies in the Supreme Court. See Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par.
III (6) (Supreme Court has jurisdiction over “[a]ll divorce and alimony cases”); see Rogers v. McGahee, 278 Ga. 287, 288 (1) (602 SE2d 582) (2004); see also Morris v. Morris, 284 Ga. 748, 750 (2) (670 SE2d 84) (2008). Accordingly, this application is hereby TRANSFERRED to the Supreme Court for disposition.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 03/26/2013 Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,__________________ I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.
, Clerk.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.