Herring v. Herring, 31436
| Decision Date | 19 October 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 31436,31436 |
| Citation | 237 Ga. 771,229 S.E.2d 756 |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
| Parties | Henry Joe HERRING v. Dollie T. HERRING. |
Andrew J. Hill, Jr., Lavonia, Lindsay A. Tise, Jr., Hartwell, Edward E. Strain, III, Cathey & Strain, Cornelia, for appellant.
Harper & Matthews, Eugene W. Harper, Jr., Robert D. Matthews, Hartwell, for appellee.
Appellant, Henry Joe Herring, brings this appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Franklin County in which the appellee, Dollie T. Herring, was granted a divorce on her motion for judgment on the pleadings.
Appellee wife filed for divorce on irretrievably broken grounds. Appellant answered, denying that the marriage was irretrievably broken, and counterclaimed for divorce alleging cruel treatment by the appellee. Appellee then moved for judgment on the pleadings, as authorized by this court's holding in Loftis v. Loftis, 236 Ga. 637, 639, 225 S.E.2d 685 (1976). The motion was granted; the court's order reads in pertinent part: '(I)t is the judgment of the Court that a total divorce be granted to the Plaintiff Wife from the Defendant Husband, that is to say a divorce a vincula matrimonii, between the Parties to the above stated case, upon legal principles' (Emphasis supplied). Appellant contends that the wording of the order results in the granting of the divorce in favor of the appellee wife, thereby inferring fault on his part. Appellant further contends that since the Loftis facts identical to the facts in this case and since the Loftis judgment granted a divorce 'to the parties' that the order in this case should be changed so as to eliminate any inferences of fault.
Loftis held that Loftis, supra at 639, 225 S.E.2d at 686. The question presented in this appeal is whether a trial court is required to grant a divorce to both parties without fixing or placing fault on either party when a divorce is granted on the pleadings on irretrievably broken grounds.
Loftis, Friedman v. Friedman, 233 Ga. 254, 210 S.E.2d 754 (1974), and similar cases have recognized the validity of divorce decrees awarded in favor of both parties, either where both allege that the marriage is irretrievably broken, or where one party alleges irretrievable brokenness and the other that he is entitled to a divorce on some other ground. While any ground for divorce other than § 30-102(13) requires a showing of fault on the part of one of the parties, and as such could support a divorce judgment in favor of one of the parties, this court has upheld the treatment of one party alleging irretrievable brokenness and the other party alleging a fault ground as the equivalent of the inability of the parties to cohabit and reconcile and has upheld the granting of these divorces on the pleadings on the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Anderson v. Anderson
...209 S.E.2d at 627. Thus, under this ground, the divorce is granted to both parties without any allocation of fault. Herring v. Herring, 237 Ga. 771, 229 S.E.2d 756 (1976). That judgment is conclusive of any and all allegations of misconduct by the parties. Therefore alimony is authorized an......
-
Dickson v. Dickson
...the trial judge erred by awarding a divorce to the wife only, rather than to both the wife and the husband. In Herring v. Herring, 237 Ga. 771, 772, 229 S.E.2d 756, 757 (1976) it was held: "Since a finding of irretrievable brokenness is one not requiring a showing of fault, it follows that ......
- Dropkin v. Dropkin, 31355
-
Walker v. Walker, 31692
...him on fault grounds rather than to the parties on the no-fault ground of irretrievable brokenness, is without merit. Herring v. Herring, 237 Ga. 771, 229 S.E.2d 756 (1976); Manning v. Manning, 237 Ga. 746, 229 S.E.2d 611 Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur. ...