Ruling on contempt sanction partially reversed; trial court impermissiby modified divorce decree when it ordered ex-husband to pay his ex-wife $1875 in lieu of transferring one-half of his 401(K) account to her;  contempt order did not merely clarify 401(K) provision in divorce decree, but transmuted award into presently-due-cash obligation; ample evidence supported trial court’s finding that ex-wife did not willfully disobey divorce decree provision requiring her to leave marital residence – run-down mobile home – in same condition; trial court did not fail to consider parties’ financial circumstances in awarding ex-wife $1,200 in attorney’s fees for contempt proceeding but trial court should reconsider fees on remand and consider revising it in its discretion to extent it was based on 401(k) issue; ex-husband waived right to closing argument at contempt hearing when he failed to request it.

Killingsworth v. Killingsworth, S09A1137 (11/23/09)

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (12/4/2009)

GA judgment upholding validity and enforceability of parties’ antenuptial agreement, AFFIRMED, 5-2; agreement was clearly contract made in contemplation of divorce, not contract made in contemplation of marriage, thus, agreement was not subject to OCGA 19-3-63’s dual attestation requirement – agreement addressed alimony and referred explicitly to possibility of divorce; record supported trial court’s finding that there are adequate pre-execution disclosure of husband’s financial statue – parties dated and/or lived together for more than 3.5 years before marriage, wife knew that husband owned professional building where she worked and wife knew that husband had siccessful real estte practice and knew about roughly 95 peson of land he owned when she signed agreement.

Lawrence v. Lawrence, S09A1370 (11/09/09)

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (November 20, 2009)

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)

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).

Judgment AFFIRMED in parties’ divorce case; trial court correctly charged jury that gifts of property between spouses during marriage are subject to equitable division; trial court did not err in giving presumption portion of gift charge, since husband claimed that conveyance of legal title to marital home to wife gave rise to equitable trust, so equitable division issue was intertwined with issues of gift and resulting trust.

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (10/16/09)

Coe v. Coe, S09F0808 (10/05/09), 09 FCDR 3147

Attorneys:Martin L. Fierman, Brenda H. Trammell

Judges: Hugh v. Wingfield III, Jasper, Superior Court; Supreme Court of Georgia, Thompson

Grant of partial summary judgment to husband in parties’ divorce case, REVERSED, as fact question remained regarding whether husband disclosed his income to wife prior to execution of prenuptial agreement;  wife did not have duty to inquire as to husband’s financial situation and insufficient evidence existed for Court to conclude as matter of law that parties’ standard of living prior to marriage put wife on notice that husband failed to disclose material facts so as to render nondisclosure immaterial.

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (10/09/09)

Quarles v. Quarles, S09A0928 (09/28/09), 09 FCDR 3046

Attorney:  Terry D. Tolbert, Lawrence L. Washburn III

Judges: Valerie Head, Gwinnett Superior Court; Supreme Court of GA, Carley