Pickle v. Pickle

Supreme Court of Georgia

Pickle v. Pickle

231 S.E.2d 61, 238 Ga. 66, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 1095

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedDecember 1, 1976

Docket31629

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 231 S.E.2d 61 (Pickle v. Pickle) 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

Pickle v. Pickle, 231 S.E.2d 61, 238 Ga. 66, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 1095 (Ga. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Undercofler, Presiding Justice.

Lyda Dell Pickle sought a divorce from Lamar Pickle on the ground of cruel treatment, and a jury trial was had on the questions of divorce, alimony and property division. The jury awarded the wife the divorce, $200 per month alimony, a 1971 Toyota, the home property which also included a store that had not been operated since 1969, and her half-interest in a farm in Mississippi. The husband appeals claiming that the verdict is excessive and that the trial court erred in charging on implied trusts. We affirm.

1. The verdict, considering that the husband retained five rental houses in addition to a sixth in which he lived, was not excessive.

2. Although there may be merit in the husband’s contention that the charge on implied trust was unauthorized (Bullard v. Bullard, 214 Ga. 122 (103 SE2d 570) (1958); Lane v. Lane, 149 Ga. 581 (101 SE 582) (1919)), that error, if any, was harmless. Code Ann. § 81A-161. Since the jury was authorized to award the home property to the wife as alimony or property division without any contribution toward its purchase price on her part, the charge on implied trust requiring such a finding could only have been favorable to the husband. We thus find no reversible error, and the motion for new trial was properly denied.

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.

Lyda Dell Pickle sought a divorce from Lamar Pickle on the ground of cruel treatment, and a jury trial was had on the questions of divorce, alimony and property division. The jury awarded the wife the divorce, $200 per month alimony, a 1971 Toyota, the home property which also included a store that had not been operated since 1969, and her half-interest in a farm in Mississippi. The husband appeals claiming that the verdict is excessive and that the trial court erred in charging on implied trusts. We affirm.

1. The verdict, considering that the husband retained five rental houses in addition to a sixth in which he lived, was not excessive.

2. Although there may be merit in the husband’s contention that the charge on implied trust was unauthorized (Bullard v. Bullard, 214 Ga. 122 (103 SE2d 570) (1958); Lane v. Lane, 149 Ga. 581 (101 SE 582) (1919)), that error, if any, was harmless. Code Ann. § 81A-161. Since the jury was authorized to award the home property to the wife as alimony or property division without any contribution toward its purchase price on her part, the charge on implied trust requiring such a finding could only have been favorable to the husband. We thus find no reversible error, and the motion for new trial was properly denied.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

231 S.E.2d 61, 238 Ga. 66, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 1095, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pickle-v-pickle-ga-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack