Anthony v. Anthony
Opinion
Head, Justice.
This court has repeatedly held that the judgment of a trial judge awarding custody of minor children in a *358 divorce action is a final adjudication of the right of custody on the facts then existing, and any attempt by the trial judge to retain jurisdiction, by recitations to that effect in the decree, is wholly ineffective.
637 ( 63 S. E. 2d 650 );
403 ( 67 S. E. 2d 109 );
Stout v. Pate, 209 Ga. 786 (75 S. E. 2d 748 );
Barrentine v. Barrentine, 210 Ga.
749 ( 82 S. E. 2d 857 );
14 ( 83 S. E. 2d 605 );
132 ( 91 S. E. 2d 18 ). The inclusion in the order of a prolusion that the minor child must not be taken from the jurisdiction of the court constitutes an attempt on the part of the trial court to retain exclusive jurisdiction of the case, which can not be done.
231 ( 84 S. E. 2d 833 ).
“An award of custody in divorce proceedings, based upon an agreement of the parties providing that the trial court should retain jurisdiction of custody of the children, is a final judgment on the facts then existing, and further proceedings relating to such question against the person awarded custody by the divorce court, must be brought in the county of such person’s residence.”
894 ( 89 S. E. 2d 654 ).
It was error to overrule the demurrer based on the failure of the petition to allege jurisdiction of the respondent.
Judgment reversed.
All the Justices concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 18 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.