EHRMAN JACKSON v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, Ex. Rel., AMIR ETERNITY HODGE
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
Date FiledAugust 14, 2026
DocketA27A0023
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Court of Appeals
of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA,____________________
August 14, 2026
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
A27A0023. EHRMAN JACKSON v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN
RESOURCES, EX. REL., AMIR ETERNITY HODGE et al.
In 2005, the trial court entered an order requiring Ehrman Jackson to pay child
support. Thereafter, several contempt motions were filed, and Jackson was twice held
in contempt. In 2026, Jackson filed a motion to vacate a void judgment, request for
judicial notice, and motion to stay enforcement (“Motion to Vacate”), contesting the
court’s jurisdiction over the entire matter due to a lack of proper service. The court
denied the Motion to Vacate, and Jackson filed the instant direct appeal. We,
however, lack jurisdiction.
In substance, Jackson’s Motion to Vacate challenged the judgment under
OCGA § 9-11-60(d)(1), which provides that a motion to set aside a judgment may be
brought based upon a “[l]ack of jurisdiction over the person or the subject matter.”
See Johnson v. Adcock, 377 Ga. App. 375, 380(1) (922 SE2d 668) (2025) (“[T]here is
no magic in nomenclature. A document is to be construed by its substance or function,
rather than by its name.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). An appeal from an
order denying a motion to set aside a judgment under OCGA § 9-11-60(d) must be
made by application for discretionary review. See OCGA § 5-6-35(a)(8); Jim Ellis
Atlanta, Inc. v. Adamson, 283 Ga. App. 116, 116 (640 SE2d 688) (2006). Likewise,
OCGA § 5-6-35(a)(2) requires an application for discretionary appeal as to all
“judgments or orders in . . . domestic relations cases.” A case involving the collection
of child support constitutes a domestic relations case. Smoak v. Dep’t of Human Res.,
221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996).
“Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.”
Smoak, 221 Ga. App. at 257. Because Jackson has not followed the mandatory
procedure for discretionary review of the subject matter of this case, we do not have
jurisdiction. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________
08/14/2026
I certify that the above is a true extract from
the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Witness my signature and the seal of said court
hereto affixed the day and year last above written.
, Clerk.