Ward v. Ward

102 S.E. 35, 24 Ga. App. 695, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 462
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 27, 1920
Docket10979
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 102 S.E. 35 (Ward v. Ward) 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
Ward v. Ward, 102 S.E. 35, 24 Ga. App. 695, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 462 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. Whoever attacks the validity of a marriage has the burden of proving its invalidity, by clear, distinct, and positive proof. The presumption as to the validity of a marriage can only be negatived by disproving every reasonable possibility. Murchison v. Green, 128 Ga. 339, 342 (57 S. E. 709, 11 L. R. A. (N. S.) 702); 26 Cyc. 877 (2).

2. Where a second marriage by a person is established and it is shown that he or she had previously married another person who was living at the time of the second marriage, the presumption is that the first marriage had been dissolved by a decree of divorce, and the burden is upon the person attacking the validity of the second marriage to show that a divorce had not been granted. 26 Cyc. 880 (4), note 37, and authorities there cited.

3. Under the above rulings and the facts of the instant case, the court did not err in directing a verdict for the caveatrix; and the error in allowing, over the objections of the other party, oral testimony to the effect that the caveatrix had secured a divorce from her first husband was harmless and does not require a new trial. If this illegal evidence had been eliminated, a finding in favor of thq validity of the second marriage of the caveatrix would still have been demanded.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. Application, for administration—appeal, from Floyd superior court—Judge Wright. August 1, 1919. M: B. Eubanks, for plaintiff in error. Maddox & Boyle, contra.

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

Related

Brown v. State
66 S.E.2d 745 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1951)
Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. Reed
66 S.E.2d 360 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Nash v. Nash
32 S.E.2d 379 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1944)
Atlanta, Birmingham & Coast Railroad v. Thomas
12 S.E.2d 494 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1940)
Jackson v. Jackson
199 S.E. 251 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1938)
Addison v. Addison
197 S.E. 232 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)
New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Seals
190 S.E. 870 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1937)
Isle v. Isle
170 S.E. 211 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1933)
State Highway Board v. Lewis
167 S.E. 219 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1932)
Atlantic Bitulithic Co. v. Maxwell
150 S.E. 110 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1929)
Riley v. Kline
256 P. 535 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1927)
Estate of Tormey
256 P. 535 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1927)
Welch v. All Persons
254 P. 179 (Montana Supreme Court, 1927)
Routledge v. Githens
245 P. 1072 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1926)
Alto v. State Industrial Accident Commission
246 P. 359 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
102 S.E. 35, 24 Ga. App. 695, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ward-v-ward-gactapp-1920.