From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Smith

Supreme Court of Georgia
Jun 22, 1967
156 S.E.2d 18 (Ga. 1967)

Opinion

24116.

ARGUED JUNE 12, 1967.

DECIDED JUNE 22, 1967. REHEARING DENIED JULY 6, 1967.

Divorce, etc. Atkinson Superior Court. Before Judge Lott.

Helms Dismukes, Jack J. Helms, Abner B. Dismukes, for appellant.

Vickers Nugent, Robert B. Sumner, Sumner Boatright, J. Laddie Boatright, for appellee.


Emma Stone Smith as plaintiff brought this action against her husband Roscoe Smith as defendant in Atkinson Superior Court seeking divorce, alimony, custody of and support for the minor children of the parties. The trial judge, without the intervention of a jury, rendered judgment in favor of plaintiff. Held:

1. In Enumeration of error No. 1 appellant complains that the trial court erred in refusing to allow the case to be tried by a jury when a timely written demand for trial was filed prior to the calling of the case for trial. Contrarily, the record discloses that no demand for jury trial was filed on or before the call of the case for trial, but was in fact filed after the case was sounded for trial, and after counsel for both sides had announced ready. There is no merit in this enumeration of error. See Seifert v. Holt, 82 Ga. 757 (1) ( 9 S.E. 843).

2. Enumeration of error No. 2 asserts that the trial court erred in dismissing the answer and demand for jury trial of the defendant, on its own motion, thereby depriving appellant of a jury trial. Even assuming arguendo that appellant's contentions are correct in this enumeration of error, the record reveals that appellant made no objection to the court's action, and such failure on the part of appellant to invoke a ruling by the trial court presents nothing for consideration in this court.

3. Enumeration of error No. 3 complains that the award of alimony by the trial court was error for the reason that it was insufficient and grossly inadequate. The necessities of the wife, when entitled to alimony, and the husband's ability to pay it, are the controlling facts to be considered and followed in making an allowance for alimony ..." Robertson v. Robertson, 207 Ga. 686, 688 ( 63 S.E.2d 876); Jenkins v. Jenkins, 69 Ga. 483. The award should be "in keeping with the family standard of living established by the husband." Hilburn v. Hilburn, 210 Ga. 497, 501 ( 81 S.E.2d 1). The evidence was ample and sufficient to authorize the trial court's award of alimony.

Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.

ARGUED JUNE 12, 1967 — DECIDED JUNE 22, 1967 — REHEARING DENIED JULY 6, 1967.


Summaries of

Smith v. Smith

Supreme Court of Georgia
Jun 22, 1967
156 S.E.2d 18 (Ga. 1967)
Case details for

Smith v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:SMITH v. SMITH

Court:Supreme Court of Georgia

Date published: Jun 22, 1967

Citations

156 S.E.2d 18 (Ga. 1967)
156 S.E.2d 18

Citing Cases

Raintree Farms, Inc. v. Stripping Center, Ltd.

OCGA § 9-11-39 (Code Ann. § 81A-139), supra; Servisco, Inc. v. R. B. M. of Atlanta, 147 Ga. App. 671 (2) (…

Matthews v. Matthews

It cannot be said that the trial court properly called this case for trial on October 14 because it did not…