Wallace v. Wallace
This text of 122 S.E. 594 (Wallace v. Wallace) 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.
Opinion
1. When husband and wife are living separately, or are bona fide in a state of separation, and there is no action for dAvoree pending, the wife may in behalf of herself and her minor children, if any, or either, institute a proceeding before the judge, under the provisions of the statute (Civil Code (1910), § 2986), to compel the husband to make provision for support as permanent alimony; but such proceeding shall be in abeyance when a libel for divorce shall be filed bona fide [898]*898by either party. Held, that a suit for permanent alimony could not be instituted under the code section just cited, in the county of the husband’s residence, after the filing of a petition for divorce by the husband against the wife in a different county in which the latter resided, it appearing that the petition for divorce had been duly served upon the wife, and that the suit for divorce was pending at the time the wife instituted her proceeding before the judge for permanent alimony.
2. As a general rule temporary alimony may be granted on the basis of an action for divorce at the instance of either party, or on the basis of a suit by the wife for permanent alimony alone where the parties are living in a bona ffde state of separation (Civil Code (1910), § 2976) ; but where the claim for temporary alimony is predicated on a claim for permanent alimony alone, and on the trial it appears that at the time of the suit for alimony was instituted there was a pending suit for divorce in another county, as indicated in the preceding headnote, it is erroneous to grant temporary alimony for the support of the wife and attorney’s fees -for prosecuting- the suit for alimony. The case differs on its facts from Hughes v. Hughes, 133 Ga. 187 (65 S. E. 404), and Banks v. Banks, 149 Ga. 517 (101 S. E. 114).
3. The judgment granting the plaintiff temporary alimony and attorney’s fees was erroneous.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
122 S.E. 594, 157 Ga. 897, 1924 Ga. LEXIS 273, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wallace-v-wallace-ga-1924.