reversed. Smith, P. J., and Bernes, J., concur. 1 He was not aware that C. L. C.’s mother had called the boy’s grandmother that morning to check on the boy. He testified, however, that this fact would not have made a difference in his decision to bring the deprivation petition. 2 In the Interest of K. L. H., 281 Ga. App. 394, 395 (636 SE2d 117) (2006) (footnote omitted). 3 See OCGA § 15-11-28 (a) (1) (C). 4 In the Interest of K. R. S., 253 Ga. App. 678, 679 (1) (560 SE2d 292) (2002) (citations omitted). 5 In re M. C. J., 271 Ga. 546, 548 (523 SE2d 6) (1999); In the Interest of D. T, 284 Ga. App. 336, 339-340 (2) (643 SE2d 842) (2007). 6 K. R. S., supra at 679 (citation and punctuation omitted); see In the Interest of B. C. R., 229 Ga. App. 111, 113-114 (1) (493 SE2d 258) (1997) (<HOLDING>). See generally Clark v. Wade, 273 Ga. 587, 599
holding that juvenile court has no jurisdiction to consider constitutional claims holding that the order of the juvenile court authorizing the filing of a delinquency petition is one of the essential documents needed when considering a challenge to juvenile jurisdiction holding juvenile court lacked jurisdiction over a grandparents deprivation petition where petition was a transparent attempt to use the juvenile court system to seek custody of the child holding that although the juvenile restitution statute does not expressly require the juvenile court to determine whether the juvenile has the ability to pay the restitution ordered as a condition of probation the policies underlying the adult restitutions command that a trial court make such an inquiry applies with equal force to juvenile courts holding that juvenile court that determined child was not dependent had no jurisdiction to thereafter determine custody of child