Atlanta Divorce Attorney Blog

Paternity testing during a divorce case is not extremely common, but this issue does arise. The Georgia Court of Appeals recently affirmed a trial court’s denial of a mother’s motion to compel paternity testing of her husband. Williamson v. Williamson, 302 Ga. App. 115 (2010). In that divorce case, the wife alleged that the child born during the marriage might not be the biological child of the father and requested paternity testing. Id. at 116. After a temporary hearing in which the parties were awarded joint legal custody, the wife’s attorney sent a letter to the husband’s attorney confirming the parties’ agreement that paternity was no longer an issue. Id. Subsequently, the wife retained a new attorney and filed a motion requesting a paternity test, which the husband opposed. Id. The child’s guardian ad litem testified that a paternity test would not be in the child’s best interest and the court denied the wife’s motion. Id.

In her appeal, the wife alleges “she is not precluded from contesting paternity.” Id. The Georgia Court of Appeals agreed with her, stating neither the purported agreement nor the temporary order determined the issue on a final basis as there was not yet a final order in the case. Id. at 177.

However, even the Georgia Court of Appeals held that the wife had the right to contest paternity, it agreed with the trial court’s denial of her motion, which was based on the “best interest of the child” standard. Id. The wife had a huge hurdle to overcome since “[a]ll children born in wedlock are deemed under law to be legitimate.” Id. Further, “[t]he public policy favoring the presumption of a child’s legitimacy is one of the most firmly-established and persuasive precepts known in law.” Id., quoting Baker v. Baker, 376 Ga. 778, 779 (1) (582 SE2d 102) (2003). In affirming the denial of the wife’s motion to compel paternity testing, the Court of Appeals followed established Georgia law and held, “…even when the child's legal father may not be the biological father, a mother who wishes to delegitimate her child is not automatically entitled to compel the legal father to submit to genetic paternity testing but must first come forward with evidence sufficient to show that delegitimating the child is in the child's best interest. The record in this case contains no such threshold showing.” Williamson, 302 Ga. App. at 118.

In this era of social networking websites such as Facebook and My Space, you can find out just about anything about anyone. You can find out their likes and dislikes, their friends, and what they like to do socially. Often, you can even see pictures to give you a snapshot into a particular person’s life. In general, if you value your privacy, you should be careful of what you post on these social networking sites. If you are involved in a family law case, you should be even more careful. Anything you post can, and likely will, be seen by the opposing party in your case and his/her attorney. If possible, this information will be used against you in your case. For example, if you are going through a divorce and are attempting to gain custody of your children, photos of you habitually drinking could be used against you to show that you are an unfit parent. If you are claiming you have no money to pay child support, photos of you with expensive cars, clothes, or jewelry, or on luxury vacations, will likely hinder your success in your case. It is best to assume that anything you post online will be seen by your adversary and act (and post!) accordingly.

The Supreme Court of Georgia recently affirmed a case from Gwinnett County Superior Court regarding relocation and child custody. Almon-Davis v. Davis, 286 Ga. 456 (2010). In that divorce case, both parties requested primary physical custody of their three minor sons. At the request of the husband, the court appointed a Guardian ad Litem (“GAL”) to investigate and make a custody recommendation. Id. at 457. After conducting his investigation, the GAL recommended that the father, who was living in Denver at the time, have primary physical custody, and the trial court entered a final judgment and decree of divorce to this effect. Id.

The mother appealed, contending “the trial court abused its discretion in adopting the GAL's report and recommendation… without considering the impact on the children of the Husband's out-of-state move.” Id. The Georiga Supreme Court disagreed, quoting a seminal relocation case, which states: “When exercising its discretion in relocation cases, as in all child custody cases, the trial court must consider the best interests of the child and cannot apply a bright-line test…[T]he primary consideration of the trial court in deciding custody matters must be directed to the best interests of the child involved, that all other rights are secondary, and that any determination of the best interests of the child must be made on a case-by-case basis. This analysis forbids the presumption that a relocating custodial parent will always lose custody and, conversely, forbids any presumption in favor of relocation.” Id., quoting Bodne v. Bodne, 277 Ga. 445 (2003). The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the transcript and found that the trial court’s consideration of the father’s move “in regard to the children’s welfare and its pragmatic consequences were pivotal” in its custody determinations. Almon-Davis at 458.

Thus, in relocation cases, there is not a presumption that someone will win or lose custody due to a party moving out of the city or state. The court will always look at the specific facts of the case and determine the best interests of the children involved.

Your first meeting with an Atlanta divorce attorney will be a time for your attorney to gather information about your case. There are several documents you should bring with you to this meeting so that the attorney can learn as much as possible.

Account statements - Bring the most recent statement for any accounts that are in your name, your spouse’s name (if it is available to you), and your joint names. This includes statements for checking/savings accounts, investment accounts, retirement accounts, credit cards, and stock options. These statements will give your attorney a good idea of the assets that will be equitably divided between your and your spouse.

Bills – Bring the most recent statement for each bill that is paid by you and/or your spouse. This includes utility bills, mortgage statements, insurance statements, medical expenses, car payments, children’s expenses and credit card statements. These documents will help in alimony/child support negotiations, and will help determine who should pay these expenses while the divorce is pending and thereafter.

Income – Bring your most recent paystub and that of your spouse (if you have access to it). In addition, bring tax returns for the previous 3 years. Income plays a large role in most divorces so it is important that your attorney has a clear picture of this issue.

In general, bring everything to your first meeting with an attorney that you think is important to your case. Once the attorney has all the information, he/she can work with you to manage your expectations about your divorce and determine the appropriate steps to take to reach a positive outcome in your case.

Atlanta divorce attorneys are often asked about the form in which child support and/or alimony payments should be made (i.e. cash, check, money order). Obviously, if the order for support specifies the form in which the payments are to be made, then the payor is obligated to make the payments in that format. Often, however, the form of payment is not specified, and it is just up to the payor to ensure that the payee receives the amount due. Since divorce and/or support cases are often contentious, we highly recommend making support payments in a format that can be tracked, such as a check, rather than cash. Even if you are on good terms with your former spouse, we recommend paying with a check. There is a reason that you are no longer married to or in a relationship with the person who you are supporting, and there is always a chance that the your relationship could sour. If you paid your support in cash, there is no paper trail, which could be problematic if the payee alleges that you did not fulfill your support obligations. In these situations, it is always better to have the ability to show documents verifying your payments, if the need arises.

When presenting your divorce, custody modification, child support modification, or other family law case to the trial court, it is imperative that your Atlanta divorce attorney presents all relevant evidence in your case. The Supreme Court of Georgia recently denied an appeal by a father in a divorce case who attempted to present evidence in his appellate brief that he did not present at his hearing in front of the Dekalb County trial court. Bankston v. Lachman, 286 Ga. 459 (2010). In that divorce case, the trial court awarded primary physical custody of the parties’ two-year-old daughter to the mother and awarded visitation to the father “for four hours each weekend until the child begins kindergarten full time,” at which point overnight visitation would begin. Id. at 459. Though the father requested overnight visitation to begin immediately, the trial court denied his request, explaining that “it believed young children should not spend long periods and weekends with non-custodial parents…[b]ased on everything [the court] had read and talked to about child development experts…” Id. at 460.

The father appealed the trial court’s denial of additional visitation arguing that “the trial court is out of sync with current opinion about the need to establish a firm parental bond between a child and his or her non-custodial parent,” and referencing two models recommending “that children have more visitation time, including overnight visits, with non-custodial parents, beginning at an early age, and increasing as the child grows older.” Id. The Supreme Court of Georgia pointed out, however, “the record does not reflect that that these models were presented to the trial court; nor does it show that trial counsel made the argument which husband asserts on appeal.” Id. Thus, these arguments could not be relied upon on appeal. The father had to prove that the trial court abused its discretion in ruling on the evidence presented to it, and this the father could not do.

To formally initiate a divorce in Georgia, one party must file a Complaint for Divorce. This is a pleading filed with the trial court that formally asks the court to grant a divorce and requests that certain things be awarded to the filing party, such as child custody, child support, alimony, and equitable division of property. As Atlanta divorce attorneys, we are often asked whether it makes a difference for one party to file versus the other. Generally, it does not make a difference. The party who does not file the Complaint for Divorce has the opportunity to file an Answer to the Complaint and Counterclaim for Divorce requesting the same things as the filing party (ex: child custody, child support, alimony, equitable division of property). Thus, that party does not lose out on anything by not filing first.

However, the timing of the filing of the Complaint for Divorce may be important in some situations. For example, if you discover your spouse is having an affair and you wait awhile to file for divorce, the court could use this timing to find that the affair was not the cause of the divorce, which could allow the cheating spouse to suffer no repercussions from his/her behavior during the divorce action. Thus, it is important that you provide your Atlanta divorce attorney with as much information as possible about your unique situation so that he/she can assess whether the timing of filing the Complaint for Divorce could be advantageous for you.

As we have discussed on previous blogs, Georgia is an equitable distribution state, which means that a division of marital assets does not have to be equal, but merely a fair division of property dependent on the particular circumstances of the case. A major asset to be divided in many cases is the marital home. The options for equitably dividing the marital home are complicated by the declining real estate market.

If neither wants to nor can afford to remain in the marital home, an option is for the parties to put the house on the market. In this case, the parties can work together with an agent, or alternate, with one party being in charge of the sale for 6 months and then the other party being in charge for the next 6 months. Of course, this option presupposes that the house will sell in a reasonable period of time, which, in this market, may not be the case. During the time the house is on the market, the parties will continue to be responsible for mortgage payments, etc., and must work out who will live in the house and pay utilities.

Another option is for one party to keep the house and refinance to take the other party’s name off the loan(s). This seems simple enough, but the refinancing party must be able to take on the entire loan. Since all of the marital assets will be split incident to the divorce, each party will most likely end up with only half of what the parties had as a married couple. In addition, in the case of dual income families, the parties likely qualified for the mortgage with combined incomes. Both of these issues may make it difficult for the party who wants to remain in the house to qualify to put the entire loan amount into his/her name.

Finally, no matter which option the parties choose or the judge orders, there is the very real possibility that the house is worth less than the amount owed on it. In this situation, the parties may be faced with the possibility of having to come to the table with money upon the sale of the house, or possibly foreclosing.

The Court of Appeals recently addressed a custody modification in a military family. In Mitcham v. Spry, the parents’ divorce settlement agreement provided that the parties would have “joint legal and physical custody, with each parent having the minor child for six months and the custodial parent having final decision making authority.” Mitcham v. Spry, 300 Ga. App. 386 (2009). At the time of the divorce both parents were in the military, so they agreed that the child would reside with his paternal grandparents in Missouri during the parents’ periods of active duty. Id. at 387.

After both parents separated from the military, the father filed a Petition for Modification of Custody and the trial court found that there had been a material change in circumstances warranting a change of primary physical custody to the father. Id. at 388. The mother appealed, arguing that the grounds upon which the trial court relied were equally weighted and, thus, custody should remain the same.

Upon review of the transcript and record, the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling of the trial court. The Court of Appeals reiterated that the trial court must look at the best interests of the child in determining custody, which they did in this case. The transcript did show that “the trial court acknowledged that both parties were fit and nurturing parents; that both had established a loving relationship with the child; and that since the time of the divorce, the parties had shared equal custody of the child.” Id. at 390. However, the trial court found that the father had a strong support system by living near his family, and that the child had developed a strong bond with the paternal grandparents from spending so much time there while his parents were deployed. Id. Under the circumstances, the Court of Appeals agreed that these facts tipped the scales in favor of the father and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding the father primary custody.

Recently, the Georgia Court of Appeals heard a case where a divorce settlement agreement affected property in the estate of one of the parties after his death. In Frier v. Frier, the parties entered into a settlement agreement regarding distribution of their property, which notably stated that each party “shall have and receive any sums of money [in] their respective checking accounts, savings accounts, IRAs, retirement funds or accounts or other properties in their own individual names." Frier v. Frier, A09A1876; Frier v. Frier, A09A1877 (2010). The husband had previously established a 12 month certificate of deposit, which was payable to the wife upon his death. Id. at 2. After the execution of the settlement agreement but before the final divorce, the husband renewed the CD but did not change the wife as beneficiary. Id. The husband died shortly after the divorce was finalized and the wife alleged that, as beneficiary, she was entitled to the funds in the CD. Id.

Despite a challenge by the executor of the husband’s estate, who argued that the settlement agreement terminated the wife’s rights as a payable on death payee, the Georgia Court of Appeals held in favor of the wife. The Court stated that though the wife “relinquished the interest she may have had in the account by virtue of her marriage,” the settlement agreement language was not sufficiently broad so as to waive “her right to payment from the POD account as the death beneficiary specified by [the husband] when he created the account and so remaining on the day he died.” Id. at 4.

In this case, the facts are not clear whether the husband intended to remove his ex-wife as beneficiary. Either way, it is a lesson to those going through a divorce of how important it is to make sure your settlement agreement addresses all assets clearly and to check and/or change the beneficiaries of any accounts you may have to prevent unintended consequences.

In child support case, the court may order a parent, or both parents, to obtain and maintain a life insurance policy (or policies) for the benefit of the minor children. OCGA 19-6-34(a). The purpose of the policy is to cover a parent’s child support obligation if he or she passes away while the children are still minors. Under the child support guidelines, both parents have an obligation to support the minor children. Thus, the court often orders both parents to obtain policies because, if either parent passes away while the children are still minors, the other parent will bear the entire obligation to support the children. The parent or parents who pay the premium on the life insurance policy may receive a deviation to the presumptive amount of child support, if the court finds the amount of the premium to be reasonable and in the child’s best interest. OCGA 19-6-34(b). Parents can also agree to maintain life insurance policies for the benefit of the minor children in a settlement agreement. OCGA 19-6-34(e).

Recently, the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the enforcement of a divorce settlement agreement over the wife/mother's objection. In that case, the father filed for divorce and sought legal and physical custody of the parties’ children. Martinez v. Martinez, 301 Ga. App. 330 (2009). While the divorce proceedings remained pending, the father filed a motion to enforce a settlement agreement. He contended that the parties had reached the agreement wherein he would be the primary custodial parent and the mother would have visitation rights. Id. The trial court granted the father’s motion and entered a “Final Order on Custody and Visitation” in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement. Id.

The mother appealed, alleging that the trial court erred in enforcing the settlement agreement “because she did not assent to the terms of the settlement and lacked capacity to contract at the time in question due to her medical condition,” and argued that the trial court “refused to receive any evidence from the parties” at the hearing on the father’s motion. Id. at 332. The mother’s allegations regarding evidence at the hearing, however, were disputed by the father and inconsistent with the trial court’s order on the motion. The Georgia Court of Appeals, therefore, affirmed, citing well established case law stating that “'[i]n order for the appellate court to determine whether the judgment appealed from was erroneous, it is the duty of the appellant to include in the record those items which will enable the appellate court to perform an objective review of the evidence and proceedings.'" Atwood v. Southeast Bedding Co., 236 Ga. App. 116 (1) (511 S.E.2d 232) (1999). Id. at 332-333. Further, "'where the proof necessary for determination of the issues on appeal is omitted from the record, an appellate court must assume that the judgment below was correct and affirm.'" Enchanted Valley RV Park Resort v. Weese, 241 Ga. App. 415, 417 (1) (c) (526 SE2d 124) (1999). Id. Because there was no transcript or other evidence in the record on appeal, the Georgia Court of Appeals was bound to presume that the trial court was correct.