King v. King

3 Citing cases

  1. Duncan v. Duncan

    262 Ga. 872 (Ga. 1993)   Cited 18 times
    Noting that "numerous factors must go into a determination of a party's earning capacity," including evidence of the "party's past income"

    ed. Still others are found in past cases in which earning capacity has been used rather than gross income in setting awards of child support, alimony, and attorney fees: the party's level of education; any specialized training or skill that the party may have; evidence of suppression of income; the party's assets and liabilities; and other funds available to the party from which these awards may be paid. Accord Wills v. Wills, 215 Ga. 556 ( 111 S.E.2d 355) (1959) (physician working on a fellowship in neurology and $10,000 equity from sale of former home); Neiman v. Neiman, 223 Ga. 812 ( 158 S.E.2d 677) (1967) ($12,000 variance in income over the past five years but other funds available and owned considerable interests in family owned corporations); McNally v. McNally, 223 Ga. 246 ( 154 S.E.2d 209) (1967) (officer in the Air Force, two homes, and a net worth of $12,400); Thomas v. Thomas, 233 Ga. 916 ( 213 S.E.2d 877) (1975) (dentist, circumstantial evidence of suppression of income); King v. King, 239 Ga. 15 ( 235 S.E.2d 502) (1977) (ownership of four pieces of income producing property and circumstantial evidence of suppression of income); Pierce v. Pierce, 241 Ga. 96 ( 243 S.E.2d 46) (1978) (expectation of shortly receiving bachelor's degree, extensive mechanical and auto repair shop training); Worrell v. Worrell, 242 Ga. 44 ( 247 S.E.2d 847) (1978) (master's degree); Gordon v. Gordon, 244 Ga. 21 ( 257 S.E.2d 528) (1979) (Ph.D. in anthropology from Harvard). 2. Appellant is 34 years old, has a high school education, and has no special training or skills.

  2. Worrell v. Worrell

    247 S.E.2d 847 (Ga. 1978)   Cited 11 times

    The ability to earn an income is one factor which may be considered by the jury in awarding alimony to the wife, and they may award alimony on this basis although the husband may be temporarily impoverished. [Cits.]" King v. King, 239 Ga. 15, 16 (2) ( 235 S.E.2d 502) (1977). See also Mack v. Mack, 234 Ga. 692 (1) ( 217 S.E.2d 278) (1975) and cits.

  3. Pierce v. Pierce

    241 Ga. 96 (Ga. 1978)   Cited 25 times
    Holding that the defendant's acquittal on a child abuse charge in a criminal proceeding was not admissible in a civil proceeding

    Johnson v. Johnson, 131 Ga. 606 (2) ( 62 S.E. 1044) (1908); Jansen v. Jansen, 160 Ga. 618 (3) ( 128 S.E. 902) (1924); Shepherd v. Shepherd, 201 Ga. 525 ( 40 S.E.2d 382) (1946); Hubbard v.Hubbard, 214 Ga. 294 (2) ( 104 S.E.2d 451) (1958); Wills v. Wills, 215 Ga. 556 (3, 8) ( 111 S.E.2d 355) (1959)." King v. King, 239 Ga. 15 ( 235 S.E.2d 502) (1977). In Hall v. Hall, 185 Ga. 502, 506 ( 195 S.E. 731) (1938), this court recognized that "[A] husband may be decreed to pay. . . alimony although he may not have property either at the time of the filing of the libel for divorce or at the time of the trial, if it appears he has an earning capacity.