Farmer v. Farmer

Supreme Court of Georgia

Farmer v. Farmer

225 S.E.2d 24, 236 Ga. 603, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 952

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 6, 1976

Docket30908

StatusPublished

This text of 225 S.E.2d 24 (Farmer v. Farmer) 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

Farmer v. Farmer, 225 S.E.2d 24, 236 Ga. 603, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 952 (Ga. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Nichols, Chief Justice.

The appellant brought a contempt citation against Henry H. Farmer to enforce an alimony award to Eleanor Farmer, now deceased. The trial court found that the 12 monthly payments provided for in the divorce decree were alimony payments and terminated on the death of the former wife. The court also found that appellant had no standing to bring a contempt action because of his appointment by the court as guardian-recipient of the payments because of the former wife’s addiction to alcohol and that the appointment terminated upon the death of the beneficiary.

We deem it unnecessary to decide whether the award to the former wife was alimony, a lump sum settlement or a property settlement. The appellant in his capacity as guardian-recipient of the fund does not have standing to bring a contempt citation to recover any amount that would be due after the death of the beneficiary. The appellant not being the guardian of the person, but only as to the fund, did not succeed to the right of an administrator under Code § 49-316.

The trial court did not err in dismissing the petition and the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Nichols, Chief Justice.

The appellant brought a contempt citation against Henry H. Farmer to enforce an alimony award to Eleanor Farmer, now deceased. The trial court found that the 12 monthly payments provided for in the divorce decree were alimony payments and terminated on the death of the former wife. The court also found that appellant had no standing to bring a contempt action because of his appointment by the court as guardian-recipient of the payments because of the former wife’s addiction to alcohol and that the appointment terminated upon the death of the beneficiary.

We deem it unnecessary to decide whether the award to the former wife was alimony, a lump sum settlement or a property settlement. The appellant in his capacity as guardian-recipient of the fund does not have standing to bring a contempt citation to recover any amount that would be due after the death of the beneficiary. The appellant not being the guardian of the person, but only as to the fund, did not succeed to the right of an administrator under Code § 49-316.

The trial court did not err in dismissing the petition and the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 S.E.2d 24, 236 Ga. 603, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 952, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farmer-v-farmer-ga-1976.