Hicks v. Walton

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hicks v. Walton

137 S.E.2d 576, 109 Ga. App. 883, 1964 Ga. App. LEXIS 1026

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided June 23, 1964·No. 40767·Published

Opinion

Felton, Chief Judge.

The condition in a ne exeat bond in an alimony proceeding is that the principal shall not absent himself from the jurisdiction of the court. Swain v. Jaudon, 147 Ga. 773 (95 SE 696); Westbrook v. Westbrook, 105 Ga. App. 67 (123 SE2d 348). Therefore, a petition to forfeit such a bond which does not allege that the principal has absented himself from the jurisdiction of the court is defective and subject to general demurrer.

The court erred in overruling the general demurrer to the petition. The judgment of the court forfeiting the bond was rendered nugatory by the erroneous overruling of the general demurrer to the petition.

Judgment reversed.

Frankum and Pannell, JJ., concur.

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

Felton, Chief Judge.

The condition in a ne exeat bond in an alimony proceeding is that the principal shall not absent himself from the jurisdiction of the court. Swain v. Jaudon, 147 Ga. 773 (95 SE 696); Westbrook v. Westbrook, 105 Ga. App. 67 (123 SE2d 348). Therefore, a petition to forfeit such a bond which does not allege that the principal has absented himself from the jurisdiction of the court is defective and subject to general demurrer.

The court erred in overruling the general demurrer to the petition. The judgment of the court forfeiting the bond was rendered nugatory by the erroneous overruling of the general demurrer to the petition.

Judgment reversed.

Frankum and Pannell, JJ., concur.

Hicks v. Walton, 137 S.E.2d 576, 109 Ga. App. 883, 1964 Ga. App. LEXIS 1026 (Ga. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

137 S.E.2d 576 (Hicks v. Walton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related