Lightfoot v. Lightfoot

99 S.E. 611, 149 Ga. 213, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 200
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJune 14, 1919
DocketNo. 1399
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 99 S.E. 611 (Lightfoot v. Lightfoot) 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
Lightfoot v. Lightfoot, 99 S.E. 611, 149 Ga. 213, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 200 (Ga. 1919).

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

In a suit for temporary and permanent alimony an order was passed requiring the husband' to pay to the wife ten dollars per month as temporary alimony and forty dollars as attorney’s fees. He failed for several months to pay either alimony or attorney’s fees; and a rule nisi was issued, requiring him to show cause' why he should not be punished as for a contempt. On the hearing he showed that he possessed no property whatever, had never enjoyed good health, had been under the treatment of a doctor for years, was unable to do manual labor, had been unable to secure employment and had earned nothing; that he resided with his father, who owned only thirty-eight acres of land; and that he was twenty years of age. No evidence was introduced in rebuttal. The court adjudged the defendant in contempt, and ordered the rule nisi made absolute, and that on failure to pay one hundred and twenty dollars within two weeks he be committed to jail, then and there to be safely kept until he complied with the order, or until further order of the court. Held, that this judgment was error. The evidence showing the inability of the husband to comply with-the judgment awarding alimony and attorney’s fees was not contradicted. Potter v. Potter, 145 Ga. 60 (88 S. E. 546).

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur, except Beck, P. J., absent.

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

Related

Brady v. Brady
187 S.E.2d 896 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1972)
Blalock v. Blalock
105 S.E.2d 721 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1958)
Robertson v. Robertson
63 S.E.2d 876 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1951)
Shahan v. Shahan
49 S.E.2d 822 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1948)
Snider v. Snider
9 S.E.2d 654 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1940)
Reese v. Reese
5 S.E.2d 777 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Poole v. Wright
3 S.E.2d 731 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Banks v. Banks
3 S.E.2d 717 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Scruggs v. Scruggs
193 S.E. 865 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1937)
Porter v. Porter
174 S.E. 527 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1934)
Heflinger v. Heflinger
159 S.E. 242 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Woodard v. Woodard
158 S.E. 569 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Wohlfort v. Wohlfort
225 P. 746 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
99 S.E. 611, 149 Ga. 213, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lightfoot-v-lightfoot-ga-1919.