Opinion
A25D0033
09-06-2024
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
This case was initiated when Ilya Goussev filed a petition seeking to adopt his minor stepchild, E. S. M. David Moynihan, the child's biological father, contested the adoption petition and the termination of his parental rights. On July 16, 2024, the trial court entered an order terminating Moynihan's parental rights and declaring that adoption was in the child's best interest, but it appears that no final order of adoption has been entered. From that order, Moynihan filed the instant pro se discretionary application from the order terminating his parental rights. For reasons that follow, we lack jurisdiction.
Moynihan filed a petition for modification of child custody and for child support in a different action in the same court. The court initially consolidated the issue of the termination of Moynihan's parental rights with Moynihan's action, but it dismissed that action for want of prosecution by order signed June 10, 2024, nunc pro tunc to June 3, 2024.
Ordinarily, a party seeking to appeal an order terminating parental rights must file an application for discretionary appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (12). But this is not a termination of parental rights case; it is an adoption case. And no final order has been entered in the adoption matter. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1) (providing for a direct appeal from a "final judgment[ ], that is to say, where the case is no longer pending in the court below"). Because the adoption remains pending below, Moynihan was required to follow the interlocutory appeal procedure of OCGA § 5-6-34 (b) in order to appeal. See Bailey v. Bailey, 266 Ga. 832, 832-833 (471 S.E.2d 213) (1996); Scruggs v. Ga. Dept. of Human Resources, 261 Ga. 587, 588-589 (1) (408 S.E.2d 103) (1991); Park v. Bailey, 329 Ga.App. 569, 571 (765 S.E.2d 721) (2014); Gray v. Springs, 224 Ga.App. 427, 427 (481 S.E.2d 3) (1997). Because he did not do so, we lack jurisdiction to consider this application, which is hereby DISMISSED.