Lovett v. Lovett

Supreme Court of Georgia

Lovett v. Lovett

167 S.E.2d 590, 225 Ga. 251, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 453

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 24, 1969

Docket25153

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 167 S.E.2d 590 (Lovett v. Lovett) 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

Lovett v. Lovett, 167 S.E.2d 590, 225 Ga. 251, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 453 (Ga. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

This appeal is from a judgment dismissing a petition for contempt for nonpayment of a judgment awarding temporary alimony. Although the award was in a suit for divorce in which alimony was awarded in 1944 pending the final adjudication and until the further order of the court, the statute of limitation does not run against a judgment for alimony, and the same is not dormant. Fischer v. Fischer, 164 Ga. 81 (137 SE 821); Fauver v. Hemperly, 178 Ga. 424 (173 SE 82); Williams v. Williams, 194 Ga. 332 (21 SE2d 229). But this award arose out of a suit for divorce, and under Code Ann. § 3-512 (Ga. L. 1953, Nov. Sess., pp. 342, 343; 1967, pp. 557, 558) (see also Code Ann. §§ 81A-141 (e) and 81A-201 (c) (Ga. L. 1966, pp. 609, 653, 687)), when that suit had been pending for five years and no written order was thereafter taken therein, including one of continuance, it was automatically dismissed, and that carried with, it the order for temporary alimony. Smint v. Smith, 219 Ga. 532, 534 (3) (134 SE2d 595); Burgess v. State, 221 Ga. 586, 587 (146 SE2d 288). However, the alimony order was valid until the automatic dismissal, and the defendant owed all amounts provided for therein until such dismissal. Since the petition showed this much due, it was error to dismiss the petition and refuse to hold the defendant in contempt until he purged himself by paying the amount due under the judgment. See Code § 30-204.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

This appeal is from a judgment dismissing a petition for contempt for nonpayment of a judgment awarding temporary alimony. Although the award was in a suit for divorce in which alimony was awarded in 1944 pending the final adjudication and until the further order of the court, the statute of limitation does not run against a judgment for alimony, and the same is not dormant. Fischer v. Fischer, 164 Ga. 81 (137 SE 821); Fauver v. Hemperly, 178 Ga. 424 (173 SE 82); Williams v. Williams, 194 Ga. 332 (21 SE2d 229). But this award arose out of a suit for divorce, and under Code Ann. § 3-512 (Ga. L. 1953, Nov. Sess., pp. 342, 343; 1967, pp. 557, 558) (see also Code Ann. §§ 81A-141 (e) and 81A-201 (c) (Ga. L. 1966, pp. 609, 653, 687)), when that suit had been pending for five years and no written order was thereafter taken therein, including one of continuance, it was automatically dismissed, and that carried with, it the order for temporary alimony. Smint v. Smith, 219 Ga. 532, 534 (3) (134 SE2d 595); Burgess v. State, 221 Ga. 586, 587 (146 SE2d 288). However, the alimony order was valid until the automatic dismissal, and the defendant owed all amounts provided for therein until such dismissal. Since the petition showed this much due, it was error to dismiss the petition and refuse to hold the defendant in contempt until he purged himself by paying the amount due under the judgment. See Code § 30-204.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

167 S.E.2d 590, 225 Ga. 251, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lovett-v-lovett-ga-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack