Whitener v. Whitener

Supreme Court of Georgia

Whitener v. Whitener

233 S.E.2d 756, 238 Ga. 555, 1977 Ga. LEXIS 1099

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 2, 1977

Docket31989

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 233 S.E.2d 756 (Whitener v. Whitener) 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

Whitener v. Whitener, 233 S.E.2d 756, 238 Ga. 555, 1977 Ga. LEXIS 1099 (Ga. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Per curiam.

This appeal is from an order finding appellant in contempt of a temporary decree in a divorce action. The decree provided that appellant satisfy a delinquent 120 day note and security deed upon the parties’ residence, which had been temporarily awarded to appellee-wife as her abode, in order to prevent foreclosure. Appellant failed to comply and the property was sold at foreclosure [556]*556sale. We affirm. The evidence is sufficient to support the trial court’s order. Also we find the provisions for purging the contempt were reasonable under the facts of this case. Findings of fact and conclusions of law were not required. Hines v. Hines, 237 Ga. 755 (229 SE2d 744) (1976).

Submitted February 16, 1977— Decided March 2, 1977 Rehearing denied March 17, 1977. Larry D. Ruskaup, for appellant. Frank M. Gleason, Clifton M. Patty, Jr., for appellees.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Per curiam.

This appeal is from an order finding appellant in contempt of a temporary decree in a divorce action. The decree provided that appellant satisfy a delinquent 120 day note and security deed upon the parties’ residence, which had been temporarily awarded to appellee-wife as her abode, in order to prevent foreclosure. Appellant failed to comply and the property was sold at foreclosure [556]*556sale. We affirm. The evidence is sufficient to support the trial court’s order. Also we find the provisions for purging the contempt were reasonable under the facts of this case. Findings of fact and conclusions of law were not required. Hines v. Hines, 237 Ga. 755 (229 SE2d 744) (1976).

Submitted February 16, 1977— Decided March 2, 1977 Rehearing denied March 17, 1977. Larry D. Ruskaup, for appellant. Frank M. Gleason, Clifton M. Patty, Jr., for appellees.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 S.E.2d 756, 238 Ga. 555, 1977 Ga. LEXIS 1099, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whitener-v-whitener-ga-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack