From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morrison v. Morrison

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Feb 20, 1980
266 S.E.2d 521 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980)

Opinion

59341.

ARGUED FEBRUARY 4, 1980.

DECIDED FEBRUARY 20, 1980. REHEARING DENIED MARCH 11, 1980.

Garnishment. Chatham State Court. Before Judge Elmore.

Alton D. Kitchings, David H. Fritts, for appellant.

John R. Calhoun, Kran Riddle, for appellee.


This appeal is from an order of the state court denying appellant's traverse and awarding appellee judgment on a garnishment affidavit filed to collect a temporary alimony award. Appellant contends that enforcement of the alimony award by garnishment is improper because the order of the superior court granting the award limited its enforcement to contempt proceedings only. He also argues that the court erred in entertaining the garnishment proceeding because the judgment upon which the garnishment was based was on appeal to the Supreme Court. Held:

1. Although appellant offered no evidence at the hearing, the trial court considered the superior court's alimony award, and copies are part of the record here. The clear language in no way suggests the limitation contended for by appellant. Both contempt and garnishment are appropriate methods of enforcing a temporary alimony award. Herring v. Herring, 138 Ga. App. 145 ( 225 S.E.2d 697) (1976).

2. Likewise, appellant's alternative argument that the trial court lacked jurisdiction because the "very order" upon which the garnishment was based was on appeal to the Supreme Court is without merit. The appeal to the Supreme Court is an appeal of an adjudication of contempt. There is nothing in the record before us to suggest that the judgment awarding temporary alimony was ever appealed. Thus, the trial court was authorized to enforce it.

3. Appellant also argues that his "appeal" acts as supersedeas rendering the garnishment award in error. In view of our holding that the trial court acted properly in enforcing the garnishment affidavit, this argument is moot.

4. The motion of appellee to assess 10 percent damages for delay under the provisions of Code Ann. § 6-1801 has been carefully considered and is denied.

Judgment affirmed. McMurray, P. J., and Smith, J., concur.


ARGUED FEBRUARY 4, 1980 — DECIDED FEBRUARY 20, 1980 — REHEARING DENIED MARCH 11, 1980.


Summaries of

Morrison v. Morrison

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Feb 20, 1980
266 S.E.2d 521 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980)
Case details for

Morrison v. Morrison

Case Details

Full title:MORRISON v. MORRISON

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Feb 20, 1980

Citations

266 S.E.2d 521 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980)
266 S.E.2d 521

Citing Cases

Stewart v. Stewart

Moreover, we have no doubt that this is what the legislature intended because the clear object in the…

Morgan v. Morgan

A decree of alimony is a money judgment coming within that definition, and as such may be the subject matter…