Harper v. Smith, S91A0053
| Decision Date | 15 May 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. S91A0053,S91A0053 |
| Citation | 261 Ga. 286,404 S.E.2d 120 |
| Parties | HARPER v. SMITH. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Shelby A. Outlaw, Adams House, Decatur, for Harper.
Howard P. Wallace, Wallace & Moss, Griffin, for Smith.
The parties were divorced on September 22, 1989 and on January 25, 1990 the appellant, Mrs. Harper, filed a contempt action against the appellee, Mr. Smith. The appellee answered and counterclaimed seeking to have portions of the original divorce decree vacated. The trial court vacated a part of the decree. We granted the appellant's application for discretionary appeal and requested the parties to address the issue of whether the trial court erred "by striking the promissory-note requirement from the divorce decree." We hold that the trial court did err, and we reverse.
A trial court has no authority, in a contempt proceeding, to modify a final judgment and divorce decree. Sells v. Eilender, 251 Ga. 463, 306 S.E.2d 662 (1983). That portion of the trial court order that vacated the promissory-note requirement was a modification of the final judgment and decree and must be reversed. The remaining portions of the contempt order are unaffected.
Judgment reversed.
All the Justices concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McCall v. McCall, A00A1178.
...finding that the party is in contempt of court). 3. Millner v. Millner, 260 Ga. 495, 497(2), 397 S.E.2d 289 (1990). 4. Harper v. Smith, 261 Ga. 286, 404 S.E.2d 120 (1991). 5. OCGA § 19-9-1(b); Blalock v. Blalock, 247 Ga. 548, 550(2), 277 S.E.2d 655 (1981); Sampson v. Sampson, 240 Ga. 118, 1......
-
Collins v. Billow, S04A0022.
...OCGA § 9-11-60. 1. A trial court has no authority to modify the terms of a divorce decree in a contempt proceeding. Harper v. Smith, 261 Ga. 286, 404 S.E.2d 120 (1991). In the present case, the divorce decree required Wife to pay weekly child support payments equal to 23% of her gross incom......
-
Wagan v. Wagan
...trial court's order in the instant case] was a modification of the final judgment and decree and must be reversed. Harper v. Smith, 261 Ga. 286, 404 S.E.2d 120 (1991). See also Everett v. Everett, 256 Ga. 632, 633(2), 352 S.E.2d 370 (1987). Compare Kaufmann v. Kaufmann, 246 Ga. 266, 268(3),......
-
Domestic Relations - Barry B. Mcgough and Gregory R. Miller
...at 577. 97. Id., 596 S.E.2d at 578. 98. 277 Ga. 604, 592 S.E.2d 843 (2004). 99. Id. at 605, 592 S.E.2d at 845 (citing Harper v. Smith, 261 Ga. 286, 404 S.E.2d 120 (1991)). 100. Id. at 604, 592 S.E.2d at 844. 101. Id. at 605-06, 592 S.E.2d at 845 (referencing the three year statute of limita......
-
Domestic Relations - Barry B. Mcgough and Gregory R. Miller
...at 170 (citing O.C.G.A. Sec. 19-9-l(b) and Blalock v. Blalock, 247 Ga. 548, 277 S.E.2d 655 (1981)). 86. . Id. (citing Harper v. Smith, 261 Ga. 286, 404 S.E.2d 120 (1991) and Martin v. Buglioli, 185 Ga. App. 702, 365 S.E.2d 866 (1988)). 87. . 248 Ga. App. 177, 546 S.E.2d 315 (2001). 88. . Id......