Jarvis v. Jarvis

• Decision Date: 29 October 2012
• Docket Number: No. S12F0889.,S12F0889.
• Citation: 291 Ga. 818,733 S.E.2d 747
• Parties: JARVIS v. JARVIS.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

291 Ga. 818

733 S.E.2d 747

JARVIS

v.JARVIS.

No. S12F0889.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Oct. 29, 2012.

Nathanael Adamson Horsley, Dawsonville, for appellant.

Jonathan Joseph Tuggle, Andrea Blair Seliski, Boyd Collar Nolen & Tuggle LLC, Atlanta, for appellee.

BENHAM, Justice.

This is a domestic relations case in which the application to appeal was granted pursuant to Rule 34(4) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Georgia. Appellant Michael Todd Jarvis (“Husband”) and appellee Tracy Dorminy Jarvis (“Wife”) were married in March 1997. Husband filed for divorce on August 24, 2009. After a five-day bench trial in March 2011, the trial court granted the parties a divorce by final judgment and decree dated April 20, 2011. The trial court gave Wife primary physical custody of the couple's three children and required Husband to pay $3,370 a month in child support. In addition to child support, the trial court ordered Husband to pay $1,500 a month in alimony for thirty-six months or until Wife's remarriage or death, or until Husband's death, whichever first occurs. The trial court ordered Husband to maintain a life insurance policy of at least $500,000 with Wife and the children listed as the named beneficiaries. At the conclusion of the divorce trial, the trial court reserved the matter of attorney's fees for later disposition upon motion made by the parties. Wife subsequently moved for an award of attorney's fees, the trial court held a hearing on June 6, 2011, and, on October 4, 2011, the trial court awarded Wife $125,477.48 in attorney's fees pursuant to OCGA § 19–6–2.

On appeal, Husband complains that the trial court abused its discretion when it considered evidence that Husband received financial support from his mother when considering the financial circumstances of the parties for the purpose of awarding attorney's fees under OCGA § 19–6–2.¹ Husband also contends that the trial court erred when it ordered that his estate continue to pay his support obligations temporarily in the event there is any delay in the disbursement of proceeds from his life insurance policy.² For reasons set forth below, we affirm.

1. As an initial matter, Wife contends this Court lacks jurisdiction over any issues concerning the divorce decree because Husband did not file his application for appeal within thirty days of the issuance of the divorce decree, but rather filed it after the trial court issued its order regarding attorney's fees. Because the trial court reserved the matter of attorney's fees, the final decree of divorce was not a final judgment as of its issuance on April 20, 2011. Miller v. Miller, 282 Ga. 164, 646 S.E.2d 469 (2007). The divorce decree did not become a final judgment for the purpose of appeal until the trial court issued its order awarding attorney's fees on October 4, 2011. Since Husband filed his discretionary application within thirty days of the order awarding attorney's fees, his application was timely. ³ Accordingly, this Court has jurisdiction to consider all issues preserved below and raised in Husband's appellate brief.

2. At trial, Husband testified that he received financial support from his mother during his marriage and after his separation from Wife. Specifically, Husband testified on direct examination that his mother provided financial support for many years prior to his separation, as well as during his separation from Wife. During the pendency of the divorce proceedings, Husband stated his mother provided him financial support to pay his attorney's fees, his credit card bills, his temporary support obligations, and his various other living expenses. Husband contends the trial court erred when it considered this evidence when awarding Wife attorney's fees pursuant to OCGA § 19–6–2. We disagree.

OCGA § 19–6–2(a)(1) provides in relevant part:

(a) The grant of attorney's fees as a part of the expenses of litigation, made at any time during the pendency of the litigation, whether the action is for ... divorce and alimony, ... shall be:

(1) Within the sound discretion of the court, except that the court shall consider the financial circumstances of both parties as a part of its determination of the amount of attorney's fees, if any, to be allowed against either party;

In its order on attorney's fees, the trial court stated that it had “examined all financial information presented in this case.” The trial court noted that it had considered Husband's base salary of $125,000 and bonus potential of $125,000 from his current employment; Husband's past earnings history which showed earnings in excess of $200,000 per year; the ten years Wife spent as a homemaker during the marriage; Wife's current earnings of $3,750 per month; monies Wife would receive in alimony and child support; Husband's purchase of a new vehicle; Wife's obtaining a used, older vehicle from her family; and Husband's receipt of financial assistance from his mother. At trial, Wife testified that she had borrowed money from her mother to pay her attorney's fees related to the divorce. The trial court additionally noted in its fee order that Wife was no longer receiving financial assistance from her mother. Husband similarly testified that his mother could no longer provide him financial support,...