Fowler v. Fowler, 16951
| Decision Date | 16 February 1950 |
| Docket Number | No. 16951,16951 |
| Citation | 57 S.E.2d 593,206 Ga. 542 |
| Parties | FOWLER v. FOWLER. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
J. E. McDonald, Cuthbert, for plaintiff in error.
Jesse G. Bowles, Cuthbert, for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court.
Mrs. Elizabeth Fowler instituted contempt proceedings against W. A. Fowler on account of his failure to comply with a judgment awarding to her permanent alimony. The case was submitted to the trial court on the pleadings. The judgment for alimony was awarded at the first term, and was based upon a written agreement between the parties. The trial court held the plaintiff in error to be in contempt. This judgment is excepted to on the ground that the original judgment for alimony is void for the reasons: that alimony was not prayed for in the divorce suit; that the decree for permanent alimony was awarded at the appearance term of court; that no process had been served on the defendant in the court below; and that the written agreement between the parties, the basis for the alimony judgment, was a private agreement between the parties, was not a court paper, and could not be made the basis for a valid decree granting permanent alimony. Held:
1. In Wilbanks v. Wilbanks, 159 Ga. 196, 125 S.E. 202, a divorce suit was filed, and an answer and cross-bill were filed thereto. The parties then agreed upon the amount of alimony to be paid, and, in order to get the case on the undefended docket, and thus heard earlier, the defendant dismissed her cross-bill praying for alimony. When the case was heard, there was no pleading praying for alimony, but the judgment included alimony in accordance with the terms of the agreement between the parties. The defendant paid the alimony for a number of years, and then refused to pay, and moved to vacate and set aside the judgment for alimony on the ground that there was no pleading to authorize the granting of alimony. The facts in the instant case disclose that the defendant in the court below paid the alimony for several months, and then stopped paying. The court in the Wilbanks case, supra, said: 'Consent cures all...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Frost v. Frost
...37 S.E.2d 407 (1946) (distinguishing Smith v. Smith, 191 Ga. 675, 13 S.E.2d 798 (1941) from Young v. Young, supra); Fowler v. Fowler, 206 Ga. 542, 57 S.E.2d 593 (1950). For this reason, we must remand this case for further findings below on this 3. In the husband's ninth enumeration of erro......
-
Jones v. Jones
...August 16, 1952. On this question two decisions of this court, to wit, Thacker v. Thacker, 167 Ga. 706, 146 S.E. 457, and Fowler v. Fowler, 206 Ga. 542, 57 S.E.2d 593, both having the concurrence of all the Justices, are in irreconcilable conflict, the former holding that such waiver did no......
-
Wimbush v. Fayette Finance Co., 60214
...to the jurisdiction of the court ...' 34 C.J. 132, § 332." Estes v. Estes, 192 Ga. 94, 98, 14 S.E.2d 681 (1941); Fowler v. Fowler, 206 Ga. 542, 543, 57 S.E.2d 593 (1950). The jurisdiction of the trial court has not been challenged in the instant In Burch v. Dodge County, 193 Ga. 890, 20 S.E......
-
Adair v. Adair
...21, 1964, as alleged, which was nine years thereafter. While it has been held that process and service may be waived, Fowler v. Fowler, 206 Ga. 542, 57 S.E.2d 593, this does not mean that it can be done at any time regardless of remoteness and in the absence of reference to a specific suit ......