Denial of husband’s motion to set aside judgment in parties’ divorce case and his motion for new trial, AFFIRMED 5-2; evidence presumably supported trial court’s ruling in absence of transcription, and in any event, wife, in her pro se response, directly challenged husband’s factual assertion that providential cause prevented him from attending divorce trial; absent transcription and in light of trial court’s order granting divorce based on ground that marriage was irretrievably broken, husband could not show harm from service of wife’s amended complaint, adding allegations of crueltry and audltery, only two days before trial.

Holmes v. Roberson-Holmes, S10F0130 (05/17/2010), 10 FCDR 1607

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (05/28/2010)