Grant of father’s motion for upward modification of mother’s child support obligation, REVERSED, as evidence did not support trial court’s ruling that mother had ability or means to earn amount, which trial court found that she could earn per month and upon which it based award; it was undisputed that mother’s income and earning capacity ad dramatically decreased from what trial court notes and projected in 2005 order and from what she actually earned in 2006 and 2007; in 2008 mothers was earning $13 per hour for gross income of approximately $1.5K per month, of which $1K went towards her monthly day care bills,  her hours as office administrator for dental practice could not be increased due to economic turn down, and she could not pursue career selling real estate, because of depressed real estate market and her inability to fund out-of-pocket expenses required of real estate agent; no evidence showed that mother was willfully underemployed, or that she was voluntarily suppressing her income to avoid child support payments; evidence did not support finding that mother was not legally pursuing biological father of her illegitimate child for child support as means of suppressing her income; $2.5K attorneys’ fee award for father, REVERSED, as evidence did not support trial court’s determination that mother had ability to pay such amount; case remanded to trial court for entry of award, which evidence supports.

Herrin v. Herrin, S10A0384 (06/28/2010), 10 FCDR 2063

From:  Fulton County Daily Report, 07/09/2010.

Judgment increasing mother’s child support obligation, REVERSED, as trial court erred in modifying it without finding substantial change in mother’s income, since entry of final divorce decree; mother’s monthly income has decreased from $2.1K to $0, due to her decision to become a stay-at-home mother to her child from her new marriage, even if trial court correctly disregarded voluntary reduction in mother’s income, evidence did not show increase in mother’s income in 2 1/2 years since her divorce, and neither party presented evidence of mother’s husband’s income; trial court erred in awarding attorney’s fees to father under OCGA 19-9-3(g) and 19-6-15(K)(5), since father was not prevailing party, in light of fact that evidence did not support increase in child support award; evidnece did not support attorneys’ fee award under any statute, in any event, as father did not provide his attorney’s actual costs or reasonableness of those costs; trial court used correct standard of whether this was material change in condition affecting children’s well being in ruling that evidence supporte denial of mother’s petition for modification of custody; mother failed to show that father’s mother’s home was inadequate for their children, that father’s late shifts at work materially affected children’s welfare, or that allowing their daughter to finish out last six wweeks of her school year at her previous school, after father moved with children to his mother’s home, adversely affected her well-being.

Harris v. Williams, A10A0294 (06/11-2010), 10 FCDR 1918.

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (06/25/2010)

Judgment AFFIRMED in parties’ divorce action; trial court DID NOT abuse its discretion in awarding wife $50K in lump sum alimony, since evidence supported trial court’s findings regarding husband’s income level; trial court DID NOT abuse its discretion in determining that home in Tattnall county was wife’s separate property, since husband quitclaimed any interest he had in property to wife prior to their second marriage; trial court DID NOT abuse its discretion in awarding wife her retirement account, given trial court’s diligent separation of parties’ assets and overall asset distribution; trial court DID NOT err in calculating child support; evidence of husband’s adulterous acts during parties’ second marriage revived his prior acts during their first marriage as admissible evidence; trial court DID NOT abuse its discretion in awarding wife attorneys’ fees; husband had reasonable notice that trial court would consider wife’s contempt claims based on unpaid child support at divorce trial.

Wood v. Wood, S07F1474 (01/08/08), 08 FCDR 66

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (01/25/08)

Judgment AFFIRMED in parties’ divorce case; trial court was not required to factor children’s private school tuition into its child support calculations and was not required to explain its decision in that regard, since it did not deviate from child support obligation table; trial court DID NOT ERR in failing to include dates for payment of modified child support payments in its temporary modification order, since original dates for payments, 15th and 30th day of each month, remained in effect, through final judgment, which changed payment dates to 1st and 15th day of each month; trial court acted within its broad discretion in setting amount and terms of payment of any attorney’s fee awards; trial court acted within its discretion in requiring wife to pay children’s heath insurance premiums through her employer-sponsored heath care plan.

Johnson v. Johnson, S08F1251 (09/22/08), 08 FCDR 2935.

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (10/03/08)

Judgment in child support case, VACATED, as trial court erred in awarding child support without making required written findings under OCGA § 19-6-15(c)(2); trial court erred in ruling that both parties would be responsible for their own attorneys’ fees, since parties agreed that party found in contempt of consent order would be responsible for payment of other party’s attorneys’ fees and trial court found mother in contempt; case remanded with direction that trial court enter order consistent with § 19-6-15 and award of attorneys’ fees consistent with parties’ agreement.

Roberts v. Tharp, S09A1961 (03/01/10), 10 FCDR 516.

From:  Fulton County Daily Report, 03/12/2010)

Judgment AFFIRMED in parties’ divorce case; trial court correctly applied source of funds rule in classifying sales proceeds from wife’s premarital house as her sole and separate property – unemployed husband presented no proof that he made alleged mortgage payments or performed any handyman work around house; husband’s claim regarding wife’s bank and credit union accounts failed, absent findings of fact, which neither party asked for; husband failed to show that trial court erred in awarding wife attorneys’ fees for his stubborn litigiousness; husband could not show that he was without fault in failing to appear at trial since he had ample notice.

Windham v. Araya, S09F1457 (02/08/2010), 10 FCDR 322

GA Judgment PARTIALLY REVERSED on remand for consideration of attorney’s fees in parties’ divorce case, as trial court exceeded its discretion in modifying final divorce decree with regard to award to wife of percentage of parties’ retirement plans; final decree valued wife’s “retirement funds according to the date of transfer with-out any mention of specific dates” and valuation adopted by trial court on remand was contrary to final decree.

Leggette v. Leggette, S09A1503 (11/09/09)

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (11/20/09)

Award of attorney’s fees, VACATED, for failure to hold required hearing; dismissal of claims, AFFIRMED, as re judicata barred them.

Mays v. City of Fairburn GA.  A09A1960 (10/08/09).

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (10/30/2009)

GA attorney disbarred for violating Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct; attorney failed to file adoption petition for one client after she paid him $900 to represent her in that matter, did not respond truthfully to client about status of matter and misrepresented facts in response to Investigative Panel; in second matter, attorney failed to ensure that his client’s incorporation documents were registered with Secretary of State, moved his office and disconnected his phone and did not respond to Investigative Panel; in third matter, attorney did not return his child support clien’ts full retainer after opposing party paid him full $1500 fee and attorney never provided client with her files or with copies of her court docuemnts; attorney’s prior disciplinary history was an aggravating factor.

In re Kimbrough III, S09Y1580 (10/19/09)

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (10/30/2009)

Judgment partially reversed in parties’ divorce case;  trial court erred in concluding severability clause in divorce decree and is ordered to strike that language from judgment on remand;  remaining portions of trial court’s judgment, affirmed; trial court had authority to strike husband’s jury trial demand as proper sanctions for his willful refusal to participate in specially set trial; language in divorce decree regarding treatment of $200K lump sum property division as alimony in event husband files bankruptcy prior to paying amount in full did not change name of award;  trial court did not err under 19-6-2 in including wife’s attorneys’ fees for appellate proceedings during pendency of litigation in its fee award.

Kautter v. Kautter, S09F0958 (10/19/09).