Robbins v. Robbins

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Robbins v. Robbins

193 S.E.2d 193, 127 Ga. App. 351, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 883

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 17, 1972

Docket47504

StatusPublished

This text of 193 S.E.2d 193 (Robbins v. Robbins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robbins v. Robbins, 193 S.E.2d 193, 127 Ga. App. 351, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 883 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Stolz, Judge.

The defendant ex-husband appeals from the grant of summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff ex-wife in her action on a New York judgment for past due alimony payments. Held:

Even assuming that the original alimony agreement is invalid for any of the reasons asserted by the defendant’s answer, the undisputed facts show a ratification of the agreement by the defendant, while represented by counsel, by his subsequent payments thereunder and his incorporation of the agreement in a Mexican divorce decree which he obtained. Brooks v. Hooks, 221 Ga. 229, 235 (144 SE2d 96); Camp v. Hatcher, 119 Ga. App. 63 (166 SE2d 422). The balance of payments due is shown by the evidence; the defendant’s remedy for reducing the amount of his obligation is the revision of the alimony [352]*352judgment pursuant to Code Ann. § 30-220 (Ga. L. 1955, pp. 630, 631; Ga. L. 1964, pp. 713, 714).

Argued September 7, 1972 Decided October 17, 1972. Rose M. Higby, for appellant. Cotton, Katz & White, Richard Katz, for appellee.

Therefore, the grant of summary judgment for the wife was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., concurs. Evans, J., concurs in the judgment only.

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

Stolz, Judge.

The defendant ex-husband appeals from the grant of summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff ex-wife in her action on a New York judgment for past due alimony payments. Held:

Even assuming that the original alimony agreement is invalid for any of the reasons asserted by the defendant’s answer, the undisputed facts show a ratification of the agreement by the defendant, while represented by counsel, by his subsequent payments thereunder and his incorporation of the agreement in a Mexican divorce decree which he obtained. Brooks v. Hooks, 221 Ga. 229, 235 (144 SE2d 96); Camp v. Hatcher, 119 Ga. App. 63 (166 SE2d 422). The balance of payments due is shown by the evidence; the defendant’s remedy for reducing the amount of his obligation is the revision of the alimony [352]*352judgment pursuant to Code Ann. § 30-220 (Ga. L. 1955, pp. 630, 631; Ga. L. 1964, pp. 713, 714).

Argued September 7, 1972 Decided October 17, 1972. Rose M. Higby, for appellant. Cotton, Katz & White, Richard Katz, for appellee.

Therefore, the grant of summary judgment for the wife was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., concurs. Evans, J., concurs in the judgment only.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

193 S.E.2d 193, 127 Ga. App. 351, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 883, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robbins-v-robbins-gactapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack