From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Interest of C. R. M

Court of Appeals of Georgia
May 7, 1986
179 Ga. App. 38 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986)

Opinion

71724.

DECIDED MAY 7, 1986.

Termination of parental rights. Ben Hill Juvenile Court. Before Judge Forrester.

Ronnie A. Wheeler, for appellant.

Gregory C. Sowell, for appellees.


The appellant mother brings this appeal from a judgment of the Ben Hill County Juvenile Court terminating her parental rights in four children. Held:

Appellant enumerates as error the juvenile court's finding of fact that one of the children, "[J. N. M.] suffers from genetic disorders, including eye problems, heart problems and constipation. She has been hospitalized for extended periods of time since her birth and she needs to be followed closely by a medical specialist." "Ordinarily, findings of fact by trial courts sitting without a jury are binding on appeal. Brook Forest Enterprises, Inc. v. Paulding County, 231 Ga. 695 ( 203 S.E.2d 860). But, where findings of fact are `clearly erroneous,' or wholly unsupported by the evidence, they may be set aside. [OCGA § 9-11-52 (a).] See also Spivey v. Mayson, 124 Ga. App. 775, 777 ( 186 S.E.2d 154); Ga. Dept. of Human Resources v. Holland, 133 Ga. App. 616 ( 211 S.E.2d 635). And `If the court's judgment is based upon a stated fact for which there is no evidence, it should be reversed.' Pinkerton Laws Co. v. Atlantis Realty Co., 128 Ga. App. 662, 665 ( 197 S.E.2d 749)." Lamas v. Baldwin, 140 Ga. App. 37, 39 (1) ( 230 S.E.2d 13).

We are unable to uphold the quoted finding of fact. Although there was some evidence from appellant's testimony that J. N. M. has an eye problem and was hospitalized, we find no evidence of probative value authorizing the remainder of this finding of fact.

Appellant also enumerates as error the juvenile court's finding that appellant "has continuously failed to keep medical appointments for the children." While there is evidence that appellant failed to keep medical appointments for S. B. M., there is no evidence in this regard as to the remaining children. Thus, this finding of fact insofar as it relates to the three other children is clearly unsupported by the evidence.

The case sub judice must be remanded for reconsideration upon corrected findings of fact. Lamas v. Baldwin, 140 Ga. App. 37, 39 (1), supra; Hardin v. Wright, 172 Ga. App. 644 ( 323 S.E.2d 918); Dotson v. Henry County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 161 Ga. App. 257, 259 ( 287 S.E.2d 696).

Accordingly, the appeal is remanded with direction that the judgment be vacated and a new one entered with appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law, after which the losing party shall be free to enter another appeal if so desired.

Appeal remanded with direction. Carley and Pope, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In the Interest of C. R. M

Court of Appeals of Georgia
May 7, 1986
179 Ga. App. 38 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986)
Case details for

In the Interest of C. R. M

Case Details

Full title:IN THE INTEREST OF C. R. M. et al

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: May 7, 1986

Citations

179 Ga. App. 38 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986)
345 S.E.2d 141

Citing Cases

Blue v. Hemmans

State v. Pickett, 288 Ga. 674, 679(2)(d), 706 S.E.2d 561 (2011). See In the Interest of Q.S., 310 Ga.App. 70,…