Taylor v. Taylor
| Decision Date | 07 October 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 26740,26740 |
| Citation | 228 Ga. 173,184 S.E.2d 471 |
| Parties | Walter E. TAYLOR, Jr. v. Mary Gartrell TAYLOR. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Errors enumerated which relate to the award of custody of the minor children, and visitation privileges, can not be considered in the absence of a transcript of the evidence.
2. The trial judge has no authority to amend the verdict of the jury in matters of substance, and it was error to include in the judgment directives to the appellant not contained in the verdict of the jury.
3. The judgment is in conflict with the verdict in directing the appellant to pay 'board' for his minor children while attending college, in addition to the monthly payment for support.
4. The judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part, with direction that erroneous portions be deleted from it.
Walter E. Taylor, Jr., Cuthbert, for appellant.
Perry, Walters, Langstaff, Lippitt & Campbell, H. H. Perry, Jr., Albany, for appellee.
Walter E. Taylor, Jr., appealed from the decree entered in the divorce action brought against him by Mrs. Mary Gartrell Taylor.
The notice of appeal stated that no transcript of the evidence would be filed for inclusion in the record.
1. The first error enumerated is that the trial judge erred in allowing the minor children to visit the appellant at such times and places as the children desired, but not giving the appellant any visitation rights. It is also asserted that the court erred in failing to permit the minor children of the parties, being older than 14 years, to select the parent they desired as custodian.
Neither of these assertions can be considered in the absence of a transcript of the evidence, or stipulation of the parties, made in conformity with Code Ann. § 6-805 (Ga.L.1965, pp. 18, 24). The affidavit of the appellant attached to his enumeration of errors can not be considered as evidence in the case. In the absence of a proper transcript or stipulation, we must assume that the trial judge made his award of custody and visitation privileges in accordance with the evidence in the case. O'Gorman v. O'Gorman, 227 Ga. 468, 181 S.E.2d 490.
2. The second error enumerated is that two quoted portions of the judgment are in conflict with the verdict rendered by the jury.
The first portion complained of is in the paragraph ordering the appellant to convey residential property to the appellee, and is as follows: 'The described property is to be delivered to the plaintiff with the same utilities and accommodations, such as drainage system, sewerage, waterlines and other utilities as accommodated the home on the date of the verdict and if any changes are made in the items mentioned in this paragraph as a result of these accommodations not being located on the 'home place' then such changes are to be made at the defendant's expense and without interrupting these services, it being the intention of this order that the described property shall continue to have facilities through which these services are furnished and that if any of such present facilities incidental to the home such as service poles, wires, pipes and the like should become unavailable to the property, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
O'Brien v. Lewis
...a lack of either proper findings or evidence to support the award, which must therefore stand as rendered. Taylor v. Taylor , 228 Ga. 173, 174 (1), 184 S.E.2d 471 (1971) (in the absence of either a transcript of evidence or a stipulation, the appellate court assumed that a trial court prope......
-
Kautter v. Kautter
...was error. Accordingly, the trial court is directed to strike this language from the judgment. See generally Taylor v. Taylor, 228 Ga. 173(4), 184 S.E.2d 471 (1971). 3. Wife in her petition for divorce sought only equitable division of the marital property. The trial court awarded her, inte......
-
Griggs v. Griggs
...of error and we will not presume that error was committed. O'Gorman v. O'Gorman, 227 Ga. 468, 181 S.E.2d 490; Taylor v. Taylor, 228 Ga. 173(1), 184 S.E.2d 471. 3. Another enumeration recites that the trial court erred in refusing to certify the father's summary of testimony and proceedings ......
-
Parker v. Parker
...expenses include costs, such as food and lodging, which are by definition part of general child support. See Taylor v. Taylor, 228 Ga. 173(3), 184 S.E.2d 471 (1971) (holding it was error for the court to award board as part of the higher education expenses to be paid in addition to monthly ......