O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-11-214 (2019)

Duration of disposition orders

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) An order of disposition in a dependency proceeding shall continue in force until the purposes of the order have been accomplished.

(b) The court may terminate an order of disposition of a child adjudicated as a dependent child on or without an application of a party if it appears to the court that the purposes of the order have been accomplished.

(c) When a child adjudicated as a dependent child reaches 18 years of age, all orders in connection with dependency proceedings affecting him or her then in force terminate and he or she shall be discharged from further obligation or control.

History

Code 1981, § 15-11-214, enacted by Ga. L. 2013, p. 294, § 1-1/HB 242; Ga. L. 2018, p. 927, § 1-4/HB 906. The 2018 amendment, effective July 1, 2020, substituted the present provisions of subsection (c) for the former provisions, which read: ‘‘Unless a child remains in DFCS care or continues to

receive services from DFCS, when a child adjudicated as a dependent child reaches 18 years of age, all orders affecting him or her then in force terminate and he or she shall be discharged from further obligation or control.’’

Annotations

Cross references. - Age of legal majority, § 39-1-1.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Inconvenient forum. - In a child custody case in which the children had been removed from their Georgia mother’s custody and had lived in Florida with their father for more than two years and most of the witnesses lived outside of Georgia, the juvenile court erred in dismissing the mother’s petition for custody

based on inconvenient forum without making specific findings demonstrating its consideration of all of the factors in O.C.G.A. § 19-9-67(b)(1) through (8). Further, the case should be stayed, not dismissed. In the Interest of A. L., 351 Ga. App. 824, 833 S.E.2d 296 (2019).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2023–2023 · leading case: In the Interest of K. A. v. a Child (Ga. Ct. App. 2023).
In the Interest of K. A. v. a Child (Ga. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “” 2 OCGA § 15-11-214 (c); see In the Interest of A.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.