Background
In a proceeding to modify child support and visitation, the trial court entered its fifth temporary order. The order awarded Haley Crowe sole physical custody, suspended Wayland Braxton Willis’s visitation pending a drug screen, restricted Willis from posting pleadings or other information about the custody case online, ordered him to pay attorney fees, and required a psychological evaluation.
The trial court reserved all other matters for later resolution. Willis sought discretionary appellate review, but challenged only the attorney-fee award.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals dismissed the application for lack of jurisdiction. Because the fifth temporary order expressly reserved other issues, it was interlocutory, and Willis was required to use the interlocutory-appeal procedure in OCGA § 5-6-34(b).
Although temporary custody rulings may be directly appealable, that rule did not apply because Willis did not challenge the custody ruling. His appeal concerned only attorney fees, so the custody provision could not supply a direct route to appellate review.
Key Takeaways
- An appeal challenging an attorney-fee award in an unresolved domestic-relations case must comply with Georgia’s interlocutory-appeal procedure.
- A directly appealable custody ruling does not make every issue in the same temporary order directly appealable.
- Appellate jurisdiction depends on the issue actually raised, not merely on other rulings included in the order.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that litigants must identify the precise ruling they seek to challenge when selecting an appellate route. A temporary order containing a custody ruling does not permit a direct appeal of an unrelated attorney-fee ruling when custody itself is not at issue on appeal.