Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, §§ 24-2402, 24-2408 and 24A-301, pre-2000 Code Section 15-11-5 and pre-2014 Code Section 15-11-28(c) and (e), which were subsequently repealed but were succeeded by provisions in this Code section, are included in the annotations for this Code section. See the Editor's notes at the beginning of the chapter.

In light of the reenactment of this chapter, effective January 1, 2014, the reader is advised to consult the annotations following Code Section 15-11-10, which may also be applicable to this Code section.

Additionally, many of the annotations found under this Code section were taken from cases decided prior to the adoption of the 1983 Constitution. See Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. III, Para. I and Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. IV, Para. I.

Juvenile court is court of special and limited jurisdiction, and the court's judgments must show on the judgment's face such facts as are necessary to give the court jurisdiction of the person and subject matter. If the order of a juvenile court fails to recite the jurisdictional facts, the judgment is void. Williams v. Department of Human Resources, 150 Ga. App. 610, 258 S.E.2d 288 (1979) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-301).

Jurisdiction over legitimation petition and for placement.

- Contrary to a mother's contention, the custody order showed on the order's face such facts as were necessary to give the juvenile court jurisdiction of the person and subject matter because the order referenced and incorporated the legitimation order entered days earlier, reflected on the order's face that all parties were served with a copy of the pleadings and were present, along with their counsel, and the mother did not contest the juvenile court's personal jurisdiction. In the Interest of B. H.-W., 332 Ga. App. 269, 772 S.E.2d 66 (2015).

Juvenile courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing only those powers specifically conferred upon the courts by statute. In re J.O., 191 Ga. App. 521, 382 S.E.2d 214 (1989), overruled on other grounds, In re T.A.W., 265 Ga. 106, 454 S.E.2d 134 (1995) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-5).

Jurisdiction of juvenile court, being civil in nature, extends only to those minors who are residents of the county. Giles v. State, 123 Ga. App. 700, 182 S.E.2d 140 (1971) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24-2402).

Constitution authorizes concurrent jurisdictional scheme.

- Law provides a concurrent jurisdictional scheme that is authorized by Ga. Const. 1976, Art. VI, Sec. IV, Para. I (see now Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. IV, Para. I). J.W.A. v. State, 233 Ga. 683, 212 S.E.2d 849 (1975) commented on in 27 Mercer L. Rev. 335 (1975) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-301).

When the controlling language of Ga. Const. 1976, Art. VI, Sec. IV, Para. I (see now Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VI, Sec. IV, Para. I) was read with the former Juvenile Code, it was apparent that a harmonious and reasonable system of concurrent jurisdiction between the juvenile courts and superior courts had been achieved. J.W.A. v. State, 233 Ga. 683, 212 S.E.2d 849 (1975) commented on in 27 Mercer L. Rev. 335 (1975) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-301).

Matters relating to custody and visitation.

- Superior and juvenile courts exercise concurrent jurisdiction over all matters relating to custody and visitation, except in those situations in which exclusive jurisdiction is vested in the superior court. In re D.N.M., 193 Ga. App. 812, 389 S.E.2d 336, cert. denied, 193 Ga. App. 910, 389 S.E.2d 336 (1989) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-5).

Concurrent jurisdiction over custody issues.

- Subsection (c) of this section is applicable only in those cases where the juvenile court and the superior court have concurrent jurisdiction and custody is the subject of controversy. Brooks v. Leyva, 147 Ga. App. 616, 249 S.E.2d 628 (1978) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-301).

Jurisdiction, once exercised, becomes exclusive.

- Jurisdiction, once exercised, becomes exclusive rather than concurrent, subject to the right of either court to transfer to the other. J.T.M. v. State, 142 Ga. App. 635, 236 S.E.2d 764 (1977) (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-301).

In custody litigation, the juvenile court errs in hearing a case in which there is no order transferring the case from the superior court. Further, if an order of a juvenile court fails to recite the jurisdictional facts (i.e., such facts as are necessary to give it jurisdiction of the person and subject matter), the judgment is void. Lockhart v. Stancil, 258 Ga. 634, 373 S.E.2d 355 (1988) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-5); In re W.W.W., 213 Ga. App. 732, 445 S.E.2d 832 (1994) but see In re M.C.J., 271 Ga. 546, 523 S.E.2d 6 (1999) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-5).

Juvenile court cannot modify superior court's custody determination.

- Juvenile court, without proper transfer from superior court, is without authority to modify custody provisions of the final divorce decree in regard to the mother's visitation privileges. In re M.M.A., 174 Ga. App. 898, 332 S.E.2d 39 (1985) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-5) Owen v. Owen, 183 Ga. App. 472, 359 S.E.2d 229 (1987);(decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-5).

Juvenile court lacked jurisdiction since there was no order of the superior court transferring the issue of custody so as to meet the requirements of subsection (c) of former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-5 (see now O.C.G.A. § 15-11-212). In re C.F., 199 Ga. App. 858, 406 S.E.2d 279 (1991) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-5).

Cited in In the Interest of D. H., 332 Ga. App. 274, 772 S.E.2d 70 (2015).

Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, opinions under former Code 1933, § 24A-301, pre-2000 Code Section 15-11-5 and pre-2014 Code Section 15-11-28(c) and (e), which were subsequently repealed but were succeeded by provisions in this Code section, are included in the annotations for this Code section. See the Editor's notes at the beginning of the chapter.

Character of proceeding determines jurisdiction.

- It is the character of the proceeding, rather than the specific items of relief granted, which determines jurisdiction. 1976 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U76-15 (decided under former Code 1933, § 24A-301).

Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act proceedings.

- Superior court may not transfer a Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, O.C.G.A. Art. 2, Ch. 11, T. 19, proceeding to a juvenile court. 1989 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U89-7 (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-5).

Paternity questions.

- Since no provision would permit the transfer of paternity questions to a juvenile court, no case in which paternity is involved may be transferred by a superior court to a juvenile court. 1989 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U89-7 (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-5).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 42 Am. Jur. 2d, Infants, § 27 et seq. 47 Am. Jur. 2d, Juvenile Courts and Delinquent and Dependent Children, § 40 et seq.

C.J.S.

- 21 C.J.S., Courts, § 343 et seq. 43 C.J.S., Infants, §§ 180 et seq., 373 et seq. 67A C.J.S., Parent and Child, §§ 99 et seq., 122 et seq.

U.L.A.

- Uniform Juvenile Court Act (U.L.A.) §§ 3, 4.

ALR.

- Jurisdiction of another court over child as affected by assumption of jurisdiction by juvenile court, 11 A.L.R. 147; 78 A.L.R. 317; 146 A.L.R. 1153.