Glover v. Glover, (No. 2446.)

• Decision Date: 14 June 1921
• Docket Number: (No. 2446.)
• Citation: 107 S.E. 861,151 Ga. 574
• Parties: GLOVER v. GLOVER.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

151 Ga. 574

107 S.E. 861

GLOVER

v.GLOVER.

(No. 2446.)

Supreme Court of Georgia.

June 14, 1921.

(Syllabus by Editorial Staff.)

Error from Superior Court, Bibb County; H. A. Mathews, Judge.

Suit by Alberta Glover against Charles Glover. Judgment granting temporary alimony and attorney's fees, and defendant brings error. Affirmed.

R. Douglas Feagin, of Macon, for plaintiff in error.

D. W. McCoy, of Macon, for defendant in error.

GILBERT, J. The petition of Alberta Glover, as originally filed, was addressed "To the Honorable H. A. Mathews, Judge of the Superior Court of said County, " and alleged, in substance, that she was the wife of Charles Glover, that because of cruel treatment on the part of her husband she was forced to leave his home, since which time she has been living apart from him, and that he has failed and refused to provide support for her, though able to do so. The prayers were for injunction, for permanent and temporary alimony and counsel fees, and for rule nisi; but the petition contained no prayer for process. The clerk of the court nevertheless attached a process, and the petition was served on the defendant. On the hearing the defendant made an oral motion to dismiss the petition, upon the. ground that it was addressed to the judge, and not to the superior court of Bibb county, and that there was no prayer for process in the petition, and that there was no action for divorce nor suit for alimony pending between the parties to said cause, and therefore the judge of Bibb superior court was without jurisdiction to entertain the prayer for alimony, or to grant any of the relief prayed for. The plaintiff offered an amendment, which was allowed by the court, striking the words "the Honorable H. A. Mathews, Judge, " and adding a prayer for process. The court overruled the motion of the defendant, and upon this ruling and judgment error is assigned.

The defendant also answered, denying the material allegations in the petition with reference to cruel treatment, and alleging his willingness to provide a home and support for the plaintiff according to his means and ability, provided she would return to him and live with him as his wife. The court, after hearing evidence, rendered a judgment "ordering the defendant to pay the plaintiff $5 a week, to commence on the 5th day of February 1921, and $5 a week on each Saturday thereafter, until the further order of the court, and to pay the plaintiff's attorneys the sum of $30 as attorney's fees, payable...