Black v. Black
292 Ga. 691
| Ga. | 2013Background
- Michelle appeals the final divorce decree, challenging jurisdiction, stay, property division, child support, and health-insurance provision.
- Georgia trial court awarded divorce to Aaron, finding Georgia domicile for adjudicating the divorce and child custody.
- New York proceedings were commenced shortly before Georgia proceedings; UCCJEA issues were raised about jurisdiction and forum.
- Trial court deviated from presumptive child-support by accounting for life-insurance premiums and travel related to visitation; findings were incomplete.
- Health-care provision attempted to keep Michelle on Tricare; the provision was found contradictory and vacated on remand for clarification.
- Court affirmed most rulings but vacated the life-insurance deviation and health-insurance provision and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction to grant divorce based on residency | Michelle contends lack of bona fide Georgia residency. | Record supports Aaron's six-month domicile in Georgia. | Georgia had jurisdiction to grant the divorce. |
| Duty to stay Georgia proceedings pending New York action | UCCJEA requires stay for child-custody questions and forum preference. | Georgia home state and timing favor proceeding in Georgia. | No abuse in refusing to stay; Georgia was the home state for custody. |
| Equitable division of marital property | Property awarded largely to Aaron, burden falls on Michelle. | Trial court exercised broad discretion with relevant factors. | No abuse; property division upheld. |
| Mother's child support deviations for life insurance | Deviation for life insurance lacks sufficient findings and should be affirmed if supported. | Deviations for travel and life insurance justified by circumstances. | Vacate the life-insurance deviation; remand for proper written findings. |
| Health-insurance provision in the final decree | Provision is ineffective; misaligned with survivor benefits and federal law. | Provision intended to aid health coverage; may reflect CHCBP options. | Vacate and remand the health-insurance provision for correction and clarification. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kuriatnyk v. Kuriatnyk, 286 Ga. 589 (Ga. 2010) (domicile requires both act and intent to reside)
- Padron v. Padron, 281 Ga. 646 (Ga. 2007) (home state/domicile analysis for jurisdiction)
- Conrad v. Conrad, 278 Ga. 107 (Ga. 2004) (domicile requires act and intent; residency tests)
- Croft v. Croft, 298 Ga. App. 303 (Ga. App. 2009) (UCCJEA home-state and forum considerations)
- Holloway v. Holloway, 288 Ga. 147 (Ga. 2010) (standards for deviating from child-support guidelines)
- Walls v. Walls, 291 Ga. 757 (Ga. 2012) (mandatory findings for child-support deviations)
- Brogdon v. Brogdon, 290 Ga. 618 (Ga. 2012) (schedule-of-deviations findings requirement)
- Turner v. Turner, 285 Ga. 866 (Ga. 2009) (divorce-decree guidance and related standards)