Song Cha Kazen v. Ronald Kazen

── Song Cha Kazen v. Ronald Kazen ── Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia Date: May 22, 2026 Category: General FIRST DIVISION BARNES, P. J., MARKLE and HODGES, JJ. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.gov/rules May 22, 2026 In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A26A0326. KAZEN v. KAZEN. MARKLE, Judge. In this discretionary appeal, wife Song Cha Kazen argues that the trial court erred by denying her motion to set aside the divorce decree under OCGA § 9-11-60(d) because service by publication was insufficient. Because the record does not show that Ronald was diligent in his attempts to locate Song Cha, service by publication was insufficient to satisfy due process, and the trial court should have granted the motion to set aside. Accordingly, we reverse. We review the denial of a motion to set aside under OCGA § 9-11-60(d) for abuse of discretion. Baez v. Garcia, 378 Ga. App. 82, 83 (923 SE2d 712) (2025). “Where it is apparent that a trial court’s judgment rests on an erroneous legal theory, an appellate court cannot affirm. When the issue is a question of law, we owe no deference to the trial court’s ruling and apply the plain legal error standard of review.” Walker v. Richmond, 362 Ga. App. 803, 804 (870 SE2d 229) (2022) (quotation marks omitted). So viewed, the record shows that Ronald and Song Cha Kazen were married in 1984 in South Korea and ultimately moved to Georgia. In April 2024, Ronald filed a complaint for divorce, asserting that Song Cha’s location was unknown. He requested to make service by publication. In the attached affidavit, Ronald’s attorney averred that he believed Song Cha was currently in South Korea; that the couple’s son would not provide Song Cha’s whereabouts; he had contacted the sheriff; and he conducted internet and social media searches, along with a search of a professional investigative database. The trial court granted the motion for service by publication, finding Ronald made diligent attempts to locate Song Cha. Thereafter, the notice appeared in the local paper in compliance with OCGA § 9-11-4(f)(1)(C). Song Cha did not appear at the subsequent hearing, and the trial court granted the divorce, awarding the marital home, all personal property in the home, the cars, 2 and the joint bank account to Ronald.1 Neither party was awarded alimony, and each was to retain bank accounts held in their own names. About five months later, Song Cha moved to set aside the divorce decree, arguing that Ronald did not act with diligence in trying to locate her to perfect service. Following a hearing, at which both Ronald and Song Cha testified, along with their son and Song Cha’s friends, the trial court denied the motion to set aside. The trial court again found that Ronald acted with diligence, but that Song Cha had hidden her location from him. We granted Song Cha’s discretionary application, and this appeal followed. On appeal, Song Cha argues that the trial court erred by granting the divorce in the absence of proper service, and that it abused its discretion when it denied the motion to set aside that order.2 We agree. 1 The record does not contain a copy of the transcript from the divorce proceeding. 2 To the extent that Song Cha challenges the underlying divorce decree, we do not review that order. Our jurisdiction is limited to deciding whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying the motion to set aside. Walker, 362 Ga. App. at 804 (“On appeal from a trial court’s denial of a motion to set aside a judgment under OCGA § 9-11-60(d), this Court is limited to a consideration of only whether the trial cou