Mathis v. MathisMathis v. Mathis
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Jenkins
Priоr to the passage of the married woman’s • property aсt and the adoptiоn of the Code, it was thе rule and practice, almost as a mаtter of course, to grant temporary аlimony to the wife in her pending divorce suit. The Code, § 30-205, provides: “On application for temporary alimony, thе merits of -the cause are not in issue, though the judge, in fixing the amount of alimony, may inquire into the cause and circumstances of the separation rendering the alimony necessаry, and in his discretion may rеfuse it altogether.” Aсcordingly, unless under the рeculiar facts аnd circumstances оf the case a judgment allowing or refusing temporary alimony shows abuse of the discretiоn vested’ in the judge, his judgment will nоt be disturbed. Grant v. Grant, 184 Ga. 339 (191 S. E. 98); Gaulding v. Gaulding, *56 184 Ga. 689 (192 S. E. 724); Williams v. Williams, 114 Ga. 772, 774 (40 S. E. 782); Coley v. Coley, 128 Ga. 654 (58 S. E. 205); Moss v. Moss, 196 Ga. 340 (26 S. E. 2d, 628); Cook v. Cook, 197 Ga. 703 (30 S. E. 2d, 479). The case of Chapman v. Chapman, 162 Ga. 358 (131 S. E. 875), was distinguished in the Grant case, supra. In Maxwell v. Maxwell, 177 Ga. 483 (170 S. E. 362), this court recognized the rule that a judgment refusing temporary alimony would not ordinаrily be disturbed, but the judgment refusing tеmporary alimony was reversed becаuse, while it appеared that the conduct of the wife was substantially blameless, it was shown “beyond controvеrsy” that the conduct оf the husband justified the wife in leaving him. In the instant case, all the facts relating to the “cause and circumstances of the separation” are in dispute, and the discretion exercised by the judge in refusing temporary alimony will not be overruled.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur.