Ford v. Ford, 347 Ga. App. 233

Christopher Matthew Ford (father) appealed the trial court's divorce judgment that awarded sole custody of the parties' four minor children to Cynthia Avery Ford (mother).
The appeal challenged the trial court's custody award but arose from a divorce proceeding.
Georgia law distinguishes between direct appeals in "child custody cases" and discretionary appeals for orders entered in "divorce cases."
The father did not file a discretionary application for review under OCGA § 5-6-35; instead he attempted a direct appeal.
The Court sua sponte examined its jurisdiction and concluded the appeal was brought by the wrong procedure.
Because the appeal was not pursued by discretionary application, the Court dismissed the appeal without reaching the merits.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a direct appeal lies from a custody award entered as part of a divorce decree	Ford argued he could directly appeal the custody award	Mother argued the custody determination was part of the divorce decree and required discretionary review	The Court held the appeal was not properly taken; discretionary application was required, so appeal dismissed

Voyles v. Voyles, 301 Ga. 44 (Supreme Court of Georgia) (explains that custody orders in divorce proceedings require discretionary appeal procedure)
Hoover v. Hoover, 295 Ga. 132 (Supreme Court of Georgia) (custody determinations ancillary to divorce do not convert the action into a child custody case for direct appeal)
Todd v. Todd, 287 Ga. 250 (Supreme Court of Georgia) (even if appeal concerns only custody, underlying subject is divorce and requires discretionary appeal)
Pathfinder Payment Solutions, Inc. v. Global Payments Direct, Inc., 344 Ga.App. 490 (Georgia Court of Appeals) (appellate courts have a duty to inquire into their jurisdiction)
Miller v. State, 264 Ga.App. 801 (Georgia Court of Appeals) (appellate courts may raise jurisdictional defects sua sponte)