Forio v. Forio

Supreme Court of Georgia

Forio v. Forio

125 S.E.2d 486, 217 Ga. 813, 1962 Ga. LEXIS 399

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 20, 1962

Docket21576

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 125 S.E.2d 486 (Forio v. Forio) 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

Forio v. Forio, 125 S.E.2d 486, 217 Ga. 813, 1962 Ga. LEXIS 399 (Ga. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Mobley, Justice.

1. The bill of exceptions complains of a judgment finding the husband in contempt of court for fail *814 ure to make payments to the wife as required under an alimony judgment. The contempt judgment recited that “after presentation of evidence, and after inspection and interpretation of the final judgment and decree . . . the defendant is hereby adjudged in contempt. . .” The trial court interpreted a provision in the alimony judgment, which required defendant to make monthly payments due under a security deed on the wife’s house, to require him to continue to make the payments to her after sale of the house, and further found that the defendant had not made other payments required by the judgment. The latter was a finding based upon a consideration of the evidence. None of the evidence was brought to this court.

Argued March 13, 1962 Decided April 20, 1962 Rehearing denied May 7, 1962. Matthews & McClelland, for plaintiff in error. Marvin P. Nodvin, contra.

2. The burden is upon one asserting error to show it affirmatively by the record and where, as here, the judgment complained of was at least based in part upon consideration of the evidence by the trial court, a determination of the error assigned in this court cannot be made without consideration of the evidence, and it will be assumed that the judgment complained of is correct. See Smith v. Smith, 213 Ga. 290 (99 SE2d 141), and Barringer v. Porter, 211 Ga. 20 (83 SE2d 603) and cases cited.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Mobley, Justice.

1. The bill of exceptions complains of a judgment finding the husband in contempt of court for fail *814 ure to make payments to the wife as required under an alimony judgment. The contempt judgment recited that “after presentation of evidence, and after inspection and interpretation of the final judgment and decree . . . the defendant is hereby adjudged in contempt. . .” The trial court interpreted a provision in the alimony judgment, which required defendant to make monthly payments due under a security deed on the wife’s house, to require him to continue to make the payments to her after sale of the house, and further found that the defendant had not made other payments required by the judgment. The latter was a finding based upon a consideration of the evidence. None of the evidence was brought to this court.

Argued March 13, 1962 Decided April 20, 1962 Rehearing denied May 7, 1962. Matthews & McClelland, for plaintiff in error. Marvin P. Nodvin, contra.

2. The burden is upon one asserting error to show it affirmatively by the record and where, as here, the judgment complained of was at least based in part upon consideration of the evidence by the trial court, a determination of the error assigned in this court cannot be made without consideration of the evidence, and it will be assumed that the judgment complained of is correct. See Smith v. Smith, 213 Ga. 290 (99 SE2d 141), and Barringer v. Porter, 211 Ga. 20 (83 SE2d 603) and cases cited.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 S.E.2d 486, 217 Ga. 813, 1962 Ga. LEXIS 399, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/forio-v-forio-ga-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack