233 Ga. App. 238 - Kempton v. Richards’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Generally, subject-matter jurisdiction [for purposes of modifying a foreign custody decree] cannot be conferred unless the foreign judgment has been domesticated. Pearson v. Pearson, 263 Ga. 400, 401 ( 435 SE2d 40 ) (1993); Blue v. Blue, 243 Ga. 22 ( 252 SE2d 452 ) (1979). Pursuant to OCGA § 19-9-55 (a), the Supreme Court of Georgia held that a child custody decree was “domesticated” by filing a certified copy of the foreign decree with a clerk of the Georgia court, even though the trial court had not entered an order domesticating the foreign judgment. Roehl v. O’Keefe, 243 Ga. 696 (1) ( 256 SE2d 375 ) (1979). See also McGowen v. McGowen, 231 Ga. App. 362 ( 498 SE2d 574 ) (1998) (physical precedent only). OCGA § 19-9-55 (a) further provides that a foreign order has the same effect as a custody decree rendered in Georgia where “(a) certified and exemplified copy of a custody decree of another state” is filed in the office of the clerk of any court of Georgia. [Cit.] Thus, a properly filed “certified and exemplified copy” results in the foreign judgment being treated as a Georgia judgment pursuant to OCGA § 19-9-55.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 237 Ga. App. 563 - Wylie v. Blatchley