Marshall v. Marshall

Supreme Court of Georgia

Marshall v. Marshall

421 S.E.2d 71, 262 Ga. 443

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 5, 1992

DocketS92A1063

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 421 S.E.2d 71 (Marshall v. Marshall) 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

Marshall v. Marshall, 421 S.E.2d 71, 262 Ga. 443 (Ga. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Fletcher, Justice.

The parties’ divorce decree, consistent with the jury verdict, requires the noncustodial parent to deposit a fixed sum in an interest-bearing account in the name of the parties’ minor child with the principal and accrued interest to be paid to the minor on her eighteenth birthday. We granted this discretionary application to consider whether this provision violates the proscription against requiring the payment of child support after a child reaches the age of majority.

1. Neither a judge nor jury may require a parent to provide child support beyond the age of majority. Clavin v. Clavin, 238 Ga. 421, 422 (233 SE2d 151) (1977). Therefore, a parent cannot be ordered to establish an account for a child from which no distribution is to be made until the child reaches 18, the age of majority. See Coleman v. Coleman, 240 Ga. 417, 423 (240 SE2d 870) (1977). Finding the jury verdict unlawfully imposes child support obligations on the father beyond the age of his daughter’s majority, we reverse.

2. The jury verdict suggests that the jury expected the father to invest $19,000 towards his daughter’s college education. Because our decision works a substantial change in the jury’s allocation of resources between the parties, we remand the case for a new trial. See Stone v. Stone, 258 Ga. 716, 717 (373 SE2d 627) (1988).

Judgment reversed.

Clarke, C. J., Bell, P. J., Hunt, Benham and Sears-Collins, JJ., concur. *444 Hackel & Hackel, Thomas M. Hackel, for appellee.

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

Fletcher, Justice.

The parties’ divorce decree, consistent with the jury verdict, requires the noncustodial parent to deposit a fixed sum in an interest-bearing account in the name of the parties’ minor child with the principal and accrued interest to be paid to the minor on her eighteenth birthday. We granted this discretionary application to consider whether this provision violates the proscription against requiring the payment of child support after a child reaches the age of majority.

1. Neither a judge nor jury may require a parent to provide child support beyond the age of majority. Clavin v. Clavin, 238 Ga. 421, 422 (233 SE2d 151) (1977). Therefore, a parent cannot be ordered to establish an account for a child from which no distribution is to be made until the child reaches 18, the age of majority. See Coleman v. Coleman, 240 Ga. 417, 423 (240 SE2d 870) (1977). Finding the jury verdict unlawfully imposes child support obligations on the father beyond the age of his daughter’s majority, we reverse.

2. The jury verdict suggests that the jury expected the father to invest $19,000 towards his daughter’s college education. Because our decision works a substantial change in the jury’s allocation of resources between the parties, we remand the case for a new trial. See Stone v. Stone, 258 Ga. 716, 717 (373 SE2d 627) (1988).

Judgment reversed.

Clarke, C. J., Bell, P. J., Hunt, Benham and Sears-Collins, JJ., concur. *444 Hackel & Hackel, Thomas M. Hackel, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

421 S.E.2d 71, 262 Ga. 443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marshall-v-marshall-ga-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack