Hawes v. Hawes

• Decision Date: 30 September 1880
• Citation: 66 Ga. 142
• Parties: Hawes. vs. Hawes.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

66 Ga. 142

Hawes. vs. Hawes.

Supreme Court of the State of Georgia

SEPTEMBER TERM, 1880.

Husband and wife. New Trial. Alimony. Before Judge Pottle. Lincoln Superior Court. October Term, 1880.

Mrs. Hawes filed her petition against her husband for alimony, alleging desertion by him, etc. He answered, denying all the principal allegations of the petition. The evidence showed, in brief, the following facts: The parties were married in 1876, and lived together for about three years. There was not cause of complaint as between the parties themselves, but the wife lived unhappily with the husband's children by a former marriage. As to the reasons for this, the evidence was conflicting. She fre-quently proposed to move into another house with him which he declined. She finally went to her sister\'s house he advising her not to go, and saying that he was sorry that she could not stay at his house. While there some communications passed between them not material here. At last an amicable meeting took place, concerning which he testified as follows:

" I then asked her what she wished me to do. She stated that she wanted me to let her stay at her sister's, and for me to support her. I replied I would, and I would do what was right, but that I would not be dictated to by Tom, Dick or Harry. That I claimed the right to manage what I had as I pleased. That I had never denied the obligation to support my wife, and do not now, and I feel the sacredness of that obligation now as ever, but claim the right to say where and how she shall be supported."

There was evidence showing that the wife had a separate estate, but no evidence as to its value.

The court granted alimony, as stated in the decision, and defendant excepted.

The bill of exceptions in this case was signed by the presiding judge, November 1oth, 1880. On December 11th, before the case was reached in the supreme court, counsel for plaintiff in error moved the court to pass the following order: " It appearing that the judge below omitted to identify the exhibits attached to the bill of exceptions in this case, when tendered to him, by placing thereon his signature, on motion, it is ordered that counsel for plaintiff in error have leave to withdraw the said bill of exceptions from the files of this court, for the purpose of returning the same to the judge below, that he may identify as aforesaid the exhibits thereunto attached."

This order was refused. Subsequently, however, counsel waiving informalities, argued the case on its merits.

F. H. & J. D. Colley, for plaintiff in error.

W. D. Tutt, for defendant.

Crawford, Justice.

This writ of error originated in a petition for temporary alimony, upon which the judge allowed the wife, upon the case made before him, $145.00 in cash, $12.50a month until otherwise ordered, and the further sum of $30.00 for counsel fees. This proceeding arises under an act of the legislature of 1870, and...