Schartle v. Trust Company Bank, 32182
| Citation | 239 Ga. 248,236 S.E.2d 602 |
| Decision Date | 20 June 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 32182,32182 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Georgia |
| Parties | Theresa P. SCHARTLE v. TRUST COMPANY BANK, Executor, et al. |
Heyman & Sizemore, William H. Major, Patrick L. Swindall, Atlanta, for appellant.
Haas, Holland, Levison & Gibert, William R. King, David L. Ross, Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan, J. D. Fleming, Jr., Andrew M. Kaufman, Atlanta, for appellees.
The executor of Ronald Schartle's estate brought a declaratory judgment action to determine the construction of an alimony provision contained in the separation agreement incorporated into Theresa and Ronald Schartle's divorce decree. Theresa, Ronald's first wife, appeals from a summary judgment for Herta Schartle, Ronald's second wife and widow.
Theresa and Ronald Schartle were divorced in 1970 after many years of marriage. The separation agreement which was incorporated into the divorce decree provided for $250 per month as alimony "until the wife shall die or remarry, whichever event shall occur first." The agreement also provided that it would survive the divorce decree and bind the parties. Later that year Ronald married Herta. In 1975 Ronald died. By his will he left one-half of his estate to his widow Herta, one-fourth to his son Ronald, Jr., and one-fourth to Theresa, his former wife. Theresa claimed that she is also entitled to continued payment of $250 as alimony from the estate pursuant to the agreement. The executor sought declaratory judgment as to whether the agreement to pay alimony to Theresa survived Ronald's death and is therefore a valid and continuing debt of his estate. Both Theresa and Herta moved for summary judgment. The trial court denied Theresa's motion for summary judgment and granted Herta's motion, declaring that Theresa has no right to continue receiving alimony from Ronald's estate.
At the outset the parties agree that in Georgia the husband's duty to pay alimony ceases upon his death unless otherwise expressly provided. Veal v. Veal, 226 Ga. 285, 287, 174 S.E.2d 435 (1970); Berry v. Berry 208 Ga. 285 (1), 66 S.E.2d 336 (1951). The former wife Theresa, however, contends that the intent of the parties to the separation agreement was that the monthly alimony payments would continue until the happening of either of two events, her remarriage or her death. She relies on Ramsay v. Sims, 209 Ga. 228, 71 S.E.2d 639 (1952), in which the court reviewed a settlement agreement incorporated into a divorce decree which...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Findley v. Findley
...settlement agreement contains a clear expression of intent to extend payments beyond the obligor's death. Schartle v. Trust Company Bank, 239 Ga. 248, 249, 236 S.E.2d 602 (1977). Thus, in order for Wife to successfully impress upon her former husband's estate the obligation to pay alimony u......
- Griggers v. Bryant, 31999
-
Gray v. Higgins
...S.E.2d 169 (Weltner, J., concurring). This rule applies "to separation agreements as well as decrees of divorce." Schartle v. Trust Co. Bank, 239 Ga. 248, 249, 236 S.E.2d 602. Additionally, as of the effective date of OCGA § 19-6-5(b) (Code Ann. § 30-209), periodic alimony also terminates u......
-
Russell v. Fulton Nat. Bank of Atlanta, 37023
...with the consent order. See Brooks v. Jones, 227 Ga. 566, 570, 181 S.E.2d 861 (1971). The trial court, citing Schartle v. Trust Company Bank, 239 Ga. 248, 236 S.E.2d 602 (1977), dismissed the complaint. The court stated: "In arriving at this conclusion the Court has also considered the case......
-
Domestic Relations - Barry B. Mcgough and Gregory R. Miller
...675, 679-80 (1970). 44. 280 Ga. 454, 629 S.E.2d 222 (2006). 45. Id. at 454, 629 S.E.2d at 223-24. 46. See Schartle v. Trust Co. Bank, 239 Ga. 248, 249, 236 S.E.2d 602, 603 (1977). 47. Findley, 280 Ga. at 454-55, 629 S.E.2d at 224. 48. 209 Ga. 228, 71 S.E.2d 639 (1952). 49. Id. at 237-38, 71......