Dawson v. Dawson

24 S.E.2d 11, 195 Ga. 289, 1943 Ga. LEXIS 472
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 13, 1943
Docket14408.
StatusPublished

This text of 24 S.E.2d 11 (Dawson v. Dawson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dawson v. Dawson, 24 S.E.2d 11, 195 Ga. 289, 1943 Ga. LEXIS 472 (Ga. 1943).

Opinion

Grice, Justice.

There is no merit in an exception to a judgment as contrary to law, when, on a hearing on a rule for contempt against the former husband for refusal to pay alimony, it appeared that although the final decree in the divorce case provided for payment of $60 per month for five years, the parties made a new contract in which it was recited that notwithstanding -all monthly payments had been made to that date, according to the original contract and decree of the court, the wife desired to accept a cash settlement in lieu of the extended monthly payments provided for in said decree, which new contract specified the payment of $500 in cash and the delivery to her of a promissory note for $325, the latter to he discharged by payments of $40 per month, and that in view of this new agreement she expressly released the husband from any and all further liability; and there being competent evidence before the judge to the effect that subsequently to said last agreement, the $500 specified therein having been paid, the former husband, after 'the maturity of the $325 note above referred to, paid to his former wife $175 in cash, which she accepted in settlement of the note, which had been misplaced or lost; whereupon, after considering the pleadings and the evidence, the judge passed orders revoking a previous order that a fi. fa. issue against defendant, finding that he was not in contempt, and ' ordering the rule discharged.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. *290 William 8. Shelf er, for plaintiff. Swift Tyler and W. E. Armistead, for defendant.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
24 S.E.2d 11, 195 Ga. 289, 1943 Ga. LEXIS 472, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dawson-v-dawson-ga-1943.