Peebles v. Peebles

197 S.E. 783, 186 Ga. 222, 1938 Ga. LEXIS 596
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJune 14, 1938
DocketNo. 12380
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 197 S.E. 783 (Peebles v. Peebles) 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
Peebles v. Peebles, 197 S.E. 783, 186 Ga. 222, 1938 Ga. LEXIS 596 (Ga. 1938).

Opinion

Russell, Chief Justice.

A petition was filed in which the plaintiff alleged that on a named date he and his former wife had been divorced, and that there had been rendered in her favor a decree for permanent alimony of $50 per month for a period of two years, on which the plaintiff had paid $100; that “since the decree for permanent alimony the petitioner and defendant have cohabited for several times on several different occasions, the first time being on Friday night Feb. 11th, 1938, and the last time being on Thursday night Feb. 24th, 1938. . . That defendant is attempting to enforce the collection of said verdict and decree by causing a rule nisi to issue against petitioner to show causé why he should not be adjudged in contempt of court and committed to jail upon his failure to pay said decree.” He prayed for judgment and decree of the court setting aside the former verdict and decree of the court for permanent alimony. The court ordered as follows: “This petition is denied, because the alleged cohabitation, if true, happened after the final verdict and decree for a divorce and alimony, at a time when they were no longer husband and wife.” The plaintiff assigns error on this judgment as contrary to law. Held, that the court did not err in holding that inasmuch as the so-called cohabitation between two persons who were formerly husband and wife, but had been divorced, transpired subsequently to the rendition of the final verdict and decree of divorce and permanent alimony, the judgment for alimony was not affected thereby.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Hamilton Burch, for plaintiff. George JS. Simpson, for defendant.

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

Related

Upton v. Duck
290 S.E.2d 92 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1982)
Rice v. Rice
1979 OK 161 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1979)
Travis v. Travis
181 S.E.2d 61 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1971)
Hamby v. Pye
24 S.E.2d 201 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1943)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
197 S.E. 783, 186 Ga. 222, 1938 Ga. LEXIS 596, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peebles-v-peebles-ga-1938.