-
Beasley, Chief Judge, concurring specially.
1. The opponent parents are both members of the State Bar of Georgia, and each is pro se on appeal. Neither of them nor the father’s attorney was present for the court’s consultation with their son, although Uniform Superior Court Rule 24.5 (B) states: “At any such consultation, attorneys for both parties may be in attendance but shall not interrogate such child/children except by express permission from the court.” The refusal of the court to record what the court characterized as a “private conversation” with the child left the father with no means of knowing the basis for any findings the court might make. Yet the court found as fact and concluded as the law of the case, reciting both in its order, that the father committed an act of simple battery as defined in the criminal code, OCGA § 16-5-23 (a) (1). Not only was the rule violated which requires that the proceedings in chambers be recorded upon request, so was due process.
2. Because the “Scope of Domestic Relations Actions” as described in USCR 24.1 does not expressly include actions under the Family Violence Act, the Council of Superior Court Judges should consider recommending to the Supreme Court the addition of this category so it is readily apparent. Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. IX, Par. I.
Document Info
Docket Number: A96A0653
Citation Numbers: 471 S.E.2d 284, 221 Ga. App. 338, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 2103, 1996 Ga. App. LEXIS 484
Judges: Beasley, Birdsong, Blackburn
Filed Date: 5/8/1996
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024