Floyd v. Floyd, 291 Ga. 605

Floyd v. Floyd involved a 2008 divorce where Kurt retained the marital residence and was obligated to refinance or list it for sale to pay Livia her equity share.
The decree incorporated a settlement requiring Kurt to refinance the mortgage or, if unable, list the home within 90 days for sale at fair market value or a mutually agreed price.
A contempt proceeding found Kurt in contempt for failing to refinance, list, pay equity, or vacate the residence, and the court ordered a purge via quitclaim deed to Livia.
The trial court also addressed Kurt’s obligations on health insurance for the children, reimbursement of premiums, and ownership of certain items (gold coin, silver bowl, silver settings).
The majority reversed the contempt portion directing a quitclaim deed, but affirmed the other contempt findings and monetary/refund aspects, with a concurrence/dissent on the quitclaim directive.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether ordering a quitclaim deed constitutes modifying the decree	Floyd contends the court modified the decree by forcing a deed	Kurt argues the order interprets, not modifies, the decree	Yes, the quitclaim directive impermissibly modifies the decree
Whether Kurt was properly held in contempt for failing to maintain health insurance	Kurt failed to provide required health insurance and reimburse premiums	The decree required him to be responsible for premiums; loss of job does not excuse breach	Kurt was properly held accountable for insurance costs and reimbursements
Whether Livia’s alleged possession of gold and silver items justified contempt findings	Livia claims the items were hers and the decree did not convey them	Items not clearly described; ownership not determined by contempt	Contempt for those items not warranted; ownership to be determined by other means
Whether the court properly declined to hold Livia in contempt for other provisions (taxes, etc.)	Kurt sought contempt for Livia’s noncompliance with tax provisions	Court reserved ruling; issue not properly before appeal without cross-appeal	Issue not resolved on appeal; not properly before us

Jett v. Jett, 291 Ga. 56 (Ga. 2012) (trial court may interpret but not modify a decree in contempt)
Greenwood v. Greenwood, 289 Ga. 163 (Ga. 2011) (limits on modifying final divorce decree in contempt)
Doane v. LeCornu, 289 Ga. 379 (Ga. 2011) (no modification of property division; contempt power to enforce decree)
Darroch v. Willis, 286 Ga. 566 (Ga. 2010) (divorce decree’s property division cannot be modified by contempt findings)
Walker v. Estate of Mays, 279 Ga. 652 (Ga. 2005) (rights under incorporated settlement derive from judgment, not contract)
Jordan v. Jordan, 313 Ga. App. 189 (Ga. App. 2011) (rights under incorporated settlement controlled by decree)
City of Rincon v. Couch, 272 Ga. App. 411 (Ga. App. 2005) (post-decree relief not available outside proper procedures)
Bradley v. State, 252 Ga. App. 293 (Ga. App. 2001) (court may enforce obligations of alimony/child support via contempt)
Buckley v. Buckley, 239 Ga. 433 (Ga. 1977) (award of property does not automatically include all items; disposition must be explicit)
Newborn v. Clay, 263 Ga. 622 (Ga. 1993) (explicitly disposed property governs ownership; non-enumerated items retained)
Hathcock v. Hathcock, 246 Ga. 233 (Ga. 1980) (waiver requires clear intent beyond mere conduct)
Schwartz v. Schwartz, 275 Ga. 107 (Ga. 2002) (avoid rendering contract terms meaningless; enforce true intent)
Blair v. Blair, 272 Ga. 94 (Ga. 2000) (replacement health insurance obligations implied in decree)