Dodson v. Dodson

Decision Date18 February 1974
Docket NumberNo. 28569,28569
Citation204 S.E.2d 109,231 Ga. 789
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court
PartiesJames G. DODSON v. Sarah Y. DODSON.

D. D. Veal, Eatonton, for appellant.

Eva L. Sloan, Milledgeville, for appellee.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court

MOBLEY, Chief Justice.

This appeal is from a verdict and judgment for divorce and alimony in favor of the wife, and from the denial of a motion for new trial by the husband.

1. The appellee wife moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the motion for new trial was premature and void because filed prior to the entry of the judgment on the verdict. Although the motion for new trial was void, the appeal was filed within 30 days after the entry of the order denying the motion, and the motion to dismiss is without merit. Harrison v. Harrison, 229 Ga. 692(1), 194 S.E.2d 87.

2. The appellant husband concedes that there was evidence to support the verdict.

3. In her complaint the wife contended that the husband had taken the keys of the automobile he had given her, and had refused to give her any form of transportation. In his answer the husband alleged that he deprived his wife of transportation because he did not consider that she and their son Virgil were competent to drive, and he did not want to risk lawsuits because of their accidents.

On the trial, counsel for the husband cross examined the wife in regard to a wreck in which their son Virgil was involved, and two lawsuits that had been filed in connection with this wreck, wherein the husband had also been sued.

The fourth enumerated error complains of a statement by the trial court that until it has been adjudicated that the husband is liable, that is not one of his liabilities. This statement was made by the court while sustaining the husband's objection to questions by the wife's counsel to her as to whether she had heard the husband say anything about being liable for the wreck.

The statement of the trial judge was correct, and this enumerated error is without merit.

4. The fifth enumerated error asserts that the court erred in refusing to admit in evidence copies of the two suits to which the evidence in the previous enumerated error referred.

The jury was fully informed by the oral testimony that the husband had been sued in two tort actions growing out of an accident in which his son was involved, in which the total amount claimed was $45,000. The allegations of the complaints in the damage actions had no relevancy to the issues being tried in the divorce action, and it was not error to refuse to admit them in evidence.

5. Enumerated error 6 asserts that the court erred in failing to charge the jury that the parties could enter into a valid...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Love v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • January 11, 1978
    ...pp. 18, 21; Ga.L.1966, pp. 493, 496; Code Ann. § 6-803); Harrison v. Harrison, 229 Ga. 692, 194 S.E.2d 87 (1972); Dodson v. Dodson, 231 Ga. 789, 204 S.E.2d 109 (1974). Dismissal of the motion is such an order "finally disposing" of the motion. B. Nor, as the State contends, did dismissal of......
  • Wall v. Citizens & Southern Bank of Houston County, 58909
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • January 9, 1980
    ...motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial in which there was no judgment following the verdict. See Dodson v. Dodson, 231 Ga. 789(1), 204 S.E.2d 109; Harrison v. Harrison, 229 Ga. 692, 194 S.E.2d 87. One may not file a motion for new trial prior to entry of the judgment......
  • McKeever v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • December 2, 1988
    ...this prematurity will not serve to deprive the appellate court of jurisdiction to review the merits of the appeal. See Dodson v. Dodson, 231 Ga. 789, 204 S.E.2d 109 (1974); Harrison v. Harrison, 229 Ga. 692(1), 194 S.E.2d 87 (1972); Joiner v. Perkerson, 160 Ga.App. 343, 287 S.E.2d 327 (1981......
  • Fuller v. Squires, 34015
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • October 31, 1978
    ...the court from exercising its judgment as to the question of alimony to be awarded in a divorce decree. See Dodson v. Dodson, 231 Ga. 789(5), 204 S.E.2d 109 (1974), and cits. It would be anomalous indeed if the parties, by private agreement after the decree, could modify the terms of a judg......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT