Spivey v. Spivey

225 S.E.2d 288, 236 Ga. 725, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 1006
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedApril 27, 1976
Docket30880
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 225 S.E.2d 288 (Spivey v. Spivey) 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
Spivey v. Spivey, 225 S.E.2d 288, 236 Ga. 725, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 1006 (Ga. 1976).

Opinion

Hill, Justice.

Jane White Spivey appeals from the denial of her amended motion for new trial in an action brought by her for separate maintenance. She raises two enumerations of error.

1. The parties lived together for ten years, but never entered into a ceremonial marriage. The evidence was conflicting as to whether there was an actual contract of marriage. The jury found that no common law marriage existed and returned a verdict for the defendant. The evidence authorized the verdict.

No case has been cited and none has been found where one party denied the existence of an actual contract of marriage and the jury finding in favor of such party has been set aside, no matter how compelling the evidence to the contrary might be. In the case of Brown v. Brown, 234 Ga. 300 (215 SE2d 671) (1975), where the evidence was similar in many respects to the evidence in the case now before us, the jury found that a contract of marriage existed. Here the jury found otherwise and we cannot say that such verdict was not supported by some evidence.

2. The plaintiff contends that she should have been granted a new trial because of the defendant’s improper contact of a juror. The defendant is a television repairman. A year and a half before the trial a juror had taken his television to the defendant for repair. Just before the trial the defendant called the juror to say the TV was ready. The plaintiff claims that the TV was repaired in exchange for favorable, influence. The trial judge conducted a hearing on this matter and denied the motion for new trial on this ground. The testimony of the [726]*726juror supports the court’s finding.

Submitted March 8, 1976 Decided April 27, 1976. Mitchell, Mitchell, Coppedge & Boyett, for appellant. Robert B. Adams, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

In Re Estate of Wilson
512 S.E.2d 383 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1999)
Busby v. Busby
249 S.E.2d 70 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
225 S.E.2d 288, 236 Ga. 725, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 1006, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spivey-v-spivey-ga-1976.