32:T474,{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"Legislation","name":"Boozer v. Boozer, 207 Ga. 52","datePublished":"1950-06-13","legislationDate":"1950-06-13","citation":"Boozer v. Boozer, 207 Ga. 52 (Ga. 1950)","countryOfOrigin":"USA","jurisdiction":"Supreme Court of Georgia","description":"Read the full text of Boozer v. Boozer (Boozer v. Boozer, 207 Ga. 52 (Ga. 1950)). This legal opinion, filed in 1950-06-13, from the Supreme Court of Georgia discusses important legal matters. Access this case and related legal documents on Midpage, an AI-powered legal research platform.","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://app.midpage.ai/document/boozer-v-boozer--1337002"},"author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Midpage"},"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Midpage"},"url":"https://app.midpage.ai/document/boozer-v-boozer--1337002","isPartOf":{"@type":"WebSite","name":"Midpage","url":"https://app.midpage.ai"},"inLanguage":"en","keywords":"legal, opinion, document, research, midpage, Boozer v. Boozer, Supreme Court of Georgia, Boozer v. Boozer, 207 Ga. 52 (Ga. 1950)","isAccessibleForFree":true,"isFamilyFriendly":true}34:T53d, Atkinson, Presiding Justice.

Where there was evidence that the husband was the owner of a S4000 equity in two dwelling houses and a vacant lot on Kirkwood Avenue, S. E., certain tools and equipment used in his business as a plumbing contractor, weekly profits from his business of 8200 per week, and that his wife had lived with him for forty years and raised six children, all of whom had reached their majority, and *53 that she had no independent income and was unable to work; and where the judgment for permanent alimony gave the wife a one-half interest in the equity in the real estate, $25 per week, and $100 as attorney’s fees — this court cannot say as a matter of law that the judgment was excessive.

No. 17095. June 13, 1950. Thomas L. Slappey, for plaintiff. Clarke & Anderson, defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.