Pearce v. Pearce

257 S.E.2d 904, 244 Ga. 69, 1979 Ga. LEXIS 1107
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJuly 2, 1979
Docket35036
StatusPublished
Cited by20 cases

This text of 257 S.E.2d 904 (Pearce v. Pearce) 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
Pearce v. Pearce, 257 S.E.2d 904, 244 Ga. 69, 1979 Ga. LEXIS 1107 (Ga. 1979).

Opinion

Undercofler, Presiding Justice.

The father and mother in this contempt action agreed at the time of their divorce "that within one year from the date of execution of this Agreement, or at such *70 time as Wife remarries if earlier than one year, each of the children shall be given the opportunity to decide as to which of its parents the child wishes to live with [sic]. In the event one or both of the children decides that he or she wishes to live with the Husband, then in such event, the terms of this Agreement applicable to said child (i.e., visitation, child support and medical coverage) shall be inverted. Thereafter, for said child, the Wife shall have the visitation rights granted herein to the Husband, and the Wife shall have the child support and medical coverage obligations herein required of the Husband.” (Emphasis supplied.) One year later, the children decided to live with the father. The mother began paying child support in accordance with their divorce agreement and decree. In January, she terminated her payments, and the father filed this contempt action. She appeals from the trial court’s order finding her in contempt. We affirm.

Submitted June 15, 1979 Decided July 2, 1979 Rehearing denied July 18, 1979. J. Robert Joiner, for appellant. Mary Walton Whiteman, for appellee.

The wife’s argument that the divorce decree cannot be modified without a proper court proceeding, while true, is of no avail to her here. The original divorce decree included the possibility that her children might choose to live with their father and that she would then be obligated for their support. She is bound by its terms until it is appropriately modified by a court order. Nor is there any merit in her argument that she is not in wilful contempt because she discontinued the payments on her attorney’s advice.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Betsy Babbett Bridger v. Martin Joseph Franze
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2018
Bridger v. Franze.
820 S.E.2d 223 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2018)
Hardin v. Hardin
790 S.E.2d 546 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2016)
BANKSTON v. WARBINGTON; And Vice Versa
771 S.E.2d 726 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2015)
Tanner v. Morris
702 S.E.2d 167 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2010)
Ford v. Hanna
668 S.E.2d 271 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2008)
Scott v. Scott
578 S.E.2d 876 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2003)
Quillen v. Quillen
462 S.E.2d 750 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
Pearson v. Pearson
454 S.E.2d 124 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
Perry v. Perry
454 S.E.2d 122 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
Kent v. Kent
452 S.E.2d 764 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
Carr v. Carr
435 S.E.2d 44 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1993)
Carr v. Carr
429 S.E.2d 95 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1993)
Weaver v. Jones
396 S.E.2d 890 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1990)
Brewton v. Rowell
325 S.E.2d 610 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
257 S.E.2d 904, 244 Ga. 69, 1979 Ga. LEXIS 1107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pearce-v-pearce-ga-1979.