Campbell v. Campbell, 42948
| Citation | 255 Ga. 461,339 S.E.2d 591 |
| Decision Date | 19 February 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 42948,42948 |
| Parties | , 54 USLW 2494 CAMPBELL v. CAMPBELL. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Georgia |
Jennifer McLeod, Robert B. Edwards, Edwards & Krontz, P.C., Douglasville, for John L. Campbell.
Virginia B. Garrett, Douglasville, for Clara A. Campbell.
This domestic case presents the question whether a settlement for a personal injury claim is subject to equitable division as a marital asset. The parties were divorced following a bench trial. The court found that the parties had amicably divided all obligations and all personal property, and that each had equity in the marital home in the amount of $12,000.00. The court noted that the only contested issue was whether a settlement in the amount of $14,000.00 arising from a personal injury to the husband was a divisible asset. Finding that the property was acquired during the marriage and was neither a gift, bequest, devise or inheritance, the court found it divisible. However, the court also found that the husband had appropriated the entire amount of the settlement to his own use and had been so evasive that the court was unable to fully understand the economic circumstances of the parties. Therefore, the court granted full title to the marital home to the wife. We reverse.
The settlement check in question was made payable to both parties. Both parties signed the release. The settlement was for injuries suffered by husband in an automobile accident which left him permanently disabled. He receives $135.00 in worker's compensation benefits and has no other income. Evidence at trial indicated that the parties had lived in separate residences since the accident but had kept their lives separate for several years before that to the extent of sleeping and eating separately, keeping separate accounts and paying bills separately with money each earned.
In Stokes v. Stokes, 246 Ga. 765, 273 S.E.2d 169 (1980), this court formally recognized the authority of a trier of fact to award property to a spouse in a domestic case not as alimony but as an equitable division of property. Guidelines for equitable division set out in the concurring opinion of Chief Justice Hill started with the premise that the separate property of each spouse at the time of the marriage or inherited during the marriage should be awarded to that spouse. In Moore v. Moore, 249 Ga. 27, 287 S.E.2d 185 (1982), and Bailey v. Bailey, 250 Ga. 15, 295 S.E.2d 304 (1982), we further defined the separate estate of a spouse to include property received by gift, bequest or devise during the marriage. However, in White v. White, 253 Ga. 267, 319 S.E.2d 447 (1984), we refused to expand the concept of the separate estate to include insurance, annuity and retirement benefits which vested in the wife upon the husband's death. In that case the husband died after the divorce decree but before the issue of equitable division was resolved, and his estate was substituted as a party.
An analysis of the question presently before us begins with an understanding of the purpose behind the doctrine of equitable division of property. This purpose is to assure that property accumulated during the marriage be fairly distributed between the parties. Although property not accumulated during the marriage and belonging to one or the other party may be taken into account in deciding questions of alimony and, indeed, the equities of the division of the marital assets, this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lopiano v. Lopiano, (SC 15899)
...42 (Alaska 1996) (compensatory damage payments); Weisfeld v. Weisfeld, supra, 1341 (workers' compensation benefits); Campbell v. Campbell, 255 Ga. 461, 339 S.E.2d 591 (1986) (personal injury settlement); Ward v. Ward, 453 N.W.2d 729 (Minn. App. 1990) (same); Mistler v. Mistler, 816 S.W.2d 2......
-
Johnson v. Johnson, 471PA85
...from equitable distribution jurisdictions. E.g., Gloria B.S. v. Richard G.S., 458 A.2d 707 (Del.Fam.Ct.1982); Campbell v. Campbell, 255 Ga. 461, 339 S.E.2d 591 (1986); In re Marriage of Gerlich, 379 N.W.2d 689 (Minn.App.1986); Van De Loo v. Van De Loo, 346 N.W.2d 173 (Minn.App.1984); In re ......
-
Mistler v. Mistler
...Wash.2d 729, 675 P.2d 1207 (1984); Krebs v. Krebs, 148 Wis.2d 51, 435 N.W.2d 240 (1989).5 See Bandow, 794 P.2d 1346; Campbell v. Campbell, 255 Ga. 461, 339 S.E.2d 591 (1986); Van de Loo v. Van de Loo, 346 N.W.2d 173 (Minn.App.1984); Marriage of Blankenship, 210 Mont. 31, 682 P.2d 1354 (1984......
-
Weisfeld v. Weisfeld, 86-2038
...(1983); see Elser & Anton, Distribution of Personal Injury Awards upon Divorce, 56 Fla.B.J. 552 (1982); see also Campbell v. Campbell, 255 Ga. 461, 339 S.E.2d 591 (1986) (personal injury award); In re Marriage of Burt, 144 Ill.App.3d 177, 98 Ill.Dec. 746, 494 N.E.2d 868 (1986) (same); Van D......
-
Are We Witnessing the Erosion of Georgia's Separate Property Distinction?
...at *2 (Ga. June 4, 2007). 33. Id. ("Given this specific finding of fact, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion."). 34. 255 Ga. 461, 339 S.E.2d 591 (1986). 35. Id. at 462, 339 S.E.2d at 593. 36. Id. at 462, 339 S.E.2d at 593. 37. Id. at 462, 339 S.E.2d at 593. 38. Baker v.......
-
The Renewed Significance of Title in Dividing Marital Assets
...in numerous cases"). [1]"> [1]">[2]"> Payson v. Payson, 274 Ga. 231, 232, 552 S.E.2d 839, 841 (2001) (quoting Campbell v. Campbell, 255 Ga. 461, 462, 339 S.E.2d 591, 593 (1986)). [2]">[3]"> See, e.g., Hargrett v. Hargrett, 242 Ga. 725, 728, 251 S.E.2d 235, 238 (1978) (stating that " "˜prope......