Milam v. Milam

Supreme Court of Georgia

Milam v. Milam

239 S.E.2d 361, 240 Ga. 33, 1977 Ga. LEXIS 1383

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 24, 1977

Docket32823

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 239 S.E.2d 361 (Milam v. Milam) 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

Milam v. Milam, 239 S.E.2d 361, 240 Ga. 33, 1977 Ga. LEXIS 1383 (Ga. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Undercofler, Presiding Justice.

Appellant’s petition to decrease his alimony payments was denied after hearing. The trial court concluded appellant’s income was not substantially less than at the time of divorce in 1974. The trial court’s findings of fact determined appellant in 1974 was drawing unemployment compensation and a military retirement of approximately $279 per month; that his present income was $104 salary per week and a military retirement of $369 per month. Appellant contends the trial court’s finding as to his 1974 income is impermissible because his petition shows his 1974 income was $200-$250 salary per week plus military retirement of $279 per month and that appellee admitted this allegation in her answer. Appellant argues that the trial court did not consider appellee’s admission of fact. *34 Unfortunately there is no transcript of the hearing. Without the transcript we can not know what transpired. Consequently we can not say that the trial court’s findings are "clearly erroneous.” Code Ann. § 81A-152 (a).

Submitted September 30, 1977 Decided October 24, 1977. Leonard Cohen, for appellant. Beard & Vaughn, William I. Beard, Ralph D. Vaughn, for appellee.

"A substantial decrease in the husband’s income or financial status since the date of the decree may warrant a decrease of alimony but does not demand it.” Potts v. Potts, 229 Ga. 827 (194 SE2d 471) (1972).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Undercofler, Presiding Justice.

Appellant’s petition to decrease his alimony payments was denied after hearing. The trial court concluded appellant’s income was not substantially less than at the time of divorce in 1974. The trial court’s findings of fact determined appellant in 1974 was drawing unemployment compensation and a military retirement of approximately $279 per month; that his present income was $104 salary per week and a military retirement of $369 per month. Appellant contends the trial court’s finding as to his 1974 income is impermissible because his petition shows his 1974 income was $200-$250 salary per week plus military retirement of $279 per month and that appellee admitted this allegation in her answer. Appellant argues that the trial court did not consider appellee’s admission of fact. *34 Unfortunately there is no transcript of the hearing. Without the transcript we can not know what transpired. Consequently we can not say that the trial court’s findings are "clearly erroneous.” Code Ann. § 81A-152 (a).

Submitted September 30, 1977 Decided October 24, 1977. Leonard Cohen, for appellant. Beard & Vaughn, William I. Beard, Ralph D. Vaughn, for appellee.

"A substantial decrease in the husband’s income or financial status since the date of the decree may warrant a decrease of alimony but does not demand it.” Potts v. Potts, 229 Ga. 827 (194 SE2d 471) (1972).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 S.E.2d 361, 240 Ga. 33, 1977 Ga. LEXIS 1383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/milam-v-milam-ga-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack