Soderburg v. Soderburg

Supreme Court of Georgia

Soderburg v. Soderburg

94 S.E.2d 873, 212 Ga. 685, 1956 Ga. LEXIS 494

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided October 29, 1956·No. 19449·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Head, Justice.

The order of the trial judge, requiring the plaintiff to execute a bond conditioned upon his returning the children to the defendant in the State of Georgia, was not in any sense a modification of the decree of the District Court of the State of Idaho. The decree upon which he relies requires that he pay their transportation and return the children to the defendant in the State of Georgia. The requirement as to the bond, under the facts of this case, was solely within the discretion of the trial judge. Pruitt v. Butterfield, 189 Ga. 593 (6 S. E. 2d 786); Good v. Good, 205 Ga. 112, 115 (52 S. E. 2d 610).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Wyatt, P. J., not participating.

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

Head, Justice.

The order of the trial judge, requiring the plaintiff to execute a bond conditioned upon his returning the children to the defendant in the State of Georgia, was not in any sense a modification of the decree of the District Court of the State of Idaho. The decree upon which he relies requires that he pay their transportation and return the children to the defendant in the State of Georgia. The requirement as to the bond, under the facts of this case, was solely within the discretion of the trial judge. Pruitt v. Butterfield, 189 Ga. 593 (6 S. E. 2d 786); Good v. Good, 205 Ga. 112, 115 (52 S. E. 2d 610).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Wyatt, P. J., not participating.

Soderburg v. Soderburg, 94 S.E.2d 873, 212 Ga. 685, 1956 Ga. LEXIS 494 (Ga. 1956).

Pincite

94 S.E.2d 873 (Soderburg v. Soderburg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related