Less than a month after the Georgia Supreme Court issued a ruling overturning the equitable status of a caregiver after a relative’s 18th birthday, the Supreme Court has reviewed its decision.
Instead of deciding whether granting visitation rights to an adoptive mother’s ex-partner is constitutional under the law, the Georgia Supreme Court instead issued opinion in McAlister v. Clifton, holding the challenge moot because the daughter the focus is on the legal dispute had turned 18.
Now, on Tuesday, the Supreme Court issued an order overturning that decision.
“Following consideration of the requests for reconsideration filed by the parties in this Complaint, it is ordered that the Court’s Opinion in the above case, rendered on December 14, 2021, be annulled and the Opinion removed from the file will, ”read the order of January 11.
Read the order
“Case is in dispute”
In January 2021, VanLanduyt Greer’s attorney Denise VanLanduyt secured a win for her client Wendi Clifton in Decatur. At the time, DeKalb County Superior Court Judge Mark A. Scott granted Clifton visitation rights to Catherine, the adopted daughter of her former partner Erin McAlister.
Represented by Decatur attorney Linda TF Day and Penelope W. Rumsey of Rumsey & Ramsey in Atlanta, McAlister appealed the decision. She argued that the trial court erred in both declaring the law constitutional and finding that Clifton was eligible to seek visitation rights as an equitable guardian.
(Photo: John Disney/ALM)
But McAlister’s appeal came too late, according to the High Court’s December 14 order.
“Catherine is now an adult, having turned 18 prior to the filing of this appeal, and the parties agree that this fact has nullified McAlister’s challenge to the granting of visiting rights,” the statement said. “We conclude that the case is contentious and therefore reverse the orders of the trial court and refer the case to the trial court with instructions to dismiss the case.”
The judges noted in the December order that no opinion had been rendered in the ruling on the merits of McAlister’s challenge to the constitutionality of the Just Carer Statute, leaving the door open to future litigation.
“Overturning the verdict, rather than simply dismissing the appeal, has the effect of ‘clearing the field and preventing a judgment that is unappealable by virtue of non-appealability from giving rise to legal consequences,'” the statement reads. “Any time an individual seeks custody or visitation under the Appropriate Caregivers Act, the opposing party may challenge the constitutionality of the law and the court may consider it, as the court did in this case.”
At that time, two-thirds of the appeals court agreed with the verdict. Judge Charles Bethel did not attend, while the expert opinion found the disqualification nullified the contribution of Presiding Judge Michael P. Boggs and Judge Carla Wong McMillian.
Read the optional statement
Fast-forward four weeks, and the same collapse of the judiciary has coincided with the decision to overturn and withdraw the Dec. 14 advisory opinion after reconsideration requests were considered.
“In this case, which was scheduled for the December 2022 term of this court, new opinion will be rendered on or before July 1, 2022,” read the Jan. 11 Supreme Court order. “No additional information is required from the parties.”
Neither the applicant’s lawyers nor the respondent responded to requests for comment on the High Court’s decision to set aside the previous order.
