Caswell v. Caswell

177 S.E. 247, 179 Ga. 676, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 370
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided November 14, 1934·No. No. 10176·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Hutcheson, J.

1. The discretion of the trial judge in allowing temporary alimony, unless it has been flagrantly abused, will not be controlled by this court. Ethridge v. Ethridge, 149 Ga. 44 (99 S. E. 37).

2. The evidence was conflicting, and it can not be said that there was such an abuse of discretion on the part of the trial judge as to require a reversal of the judgment allowing temporary alimony. Kelly v. Kelly, 146 Ga. 362 (91 S. E. 120).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Willis Smith, for plaintiff in error'. L. M. Wyatt, contra.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Caswell v. Caswell, 177 S.E. 247, 179 Ga. 676, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 370 (Ga. 1934).

177 S.E. 247 (Caswell v. Caswell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fitts v. Fitts
199 S.E.2d 256 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1973)
Brock v. Brock
186 S.E.2d 537 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1972)
Moss v. Moss
36 S.E.2d 431 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1945)
Gaulding v. Gaulding
192 S.E. 724 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1937)