the direction that findings of fact be entered on these issues.”); Dalton v. Vo, 224 Ga. App. 382, 382-83 (480 SE2d 377) (1997) (“[T]he trial court did not make the findings of fact necessary to vest it with discretion to dismiss this appeal.” (citation omitted)); Crenshaw, 202 Ga. App. at 611 (1) (reversing and remanding the denial of a motion to dismiss appeal when the trial court failed to make findings of fact and instead denied “without elaboration”); Ga. Dep’t of Human Res., 194 Ga. App. at 279 (“The failure to ascertain the reasonableness and excusableness of the delay mandates a reversal of the order and a remand with instruction that findings be made on these issues.” (citations omitted)). Compare Mitchell v. 3280 Peachtree 1, LLC, 285 Ga. 576,577 (2) (678 SE2d 880) (2009) (<HOLDING>); Brandenburg v. All-Fleet Refinishing, Inc.,
holding that trial court made sufficient findings of fact when it dismissed appeal holding that a reviewing court will only presume that the trial court made implicit factual findings when such findings were necessary to its ultimate conclusion holding that an issue was not properly before the court on appeal because the trial court did not have the opportunity to make any findings of fact regarding it holding the findings of fact required to support an alimony award are sufficient if findings of fact have been made on the ultimate facts at issue in the case and the findings of fact show the trial court properly applied the law in the case holding because defendant does not argue in his brief that these findings of fact are not supported by    evidence in the record this court is bound by the trial courts findings of fact