Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 19-11-40 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 19-11-40 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 19-11-40

TITLE 19 DOMESTIC RELATIONS

Section 11. Enforcement of Duty of Support, 19-11-1 through 19-11-191.

ARTICLE 2 UNIFORM RECIPROCAL ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT ACT

19-11-40. Short title.

This article may be cited as the "Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act."

(Ga. L. 1958, p. 34, § 34.)

Editor's notes.

- Ga. L. 1958, p. 34, §§ 29 and 30, not codified by the General Assembly, provide that judgments, decrees, or orders issued under the authority of laws utilized prior to initial passage in 1958 of this article shall continue in validity.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Ga. L. 1958, p. 34 (see now O.C.G.A. § 19-11-40 et seq.) does not apply merely in cases of actual nonsupport. Zimmerman v. Zimmerman, 131 Ga. App. 567, 206 S.E.2d 583 (1974).

Counterclaim for modification not permitted in contempt proceeding.

- Counterclaim for modification of a Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-11-40 et seq., support order may not be asserted by the defendant in a URESA contempt proceeding. The only issue for determination in a URESA contempt proceeding is the enforcement of the support obligation previously established by the URESA order. State v. Garrish, 197 Ga. App. 816, 399 S.E.2d 572 (1990).

Spousal consent precluded arrears recovery.

- When wife consented to allowing the minor child of the parties to live with the husband in Germany for a three-year period and did not provide any support for the child during that three year period; the husband provided all of the support for the child during that period and not until three years after the child had returned from Germany did the wife seek to recover any child support for the time the child spent in Germany, the wife could be said to have consented to the husband's voluntary expenditures as an alternative to his child support obligation and, as a result, the trial court erred in concluding that the husband was in arrears in the payment of child support for the three-year period at issue. Brown v. Georgia Dep't of Human Resources ex rel. Brown, 263 Ga. 53, 428 S.E.2d 81 (1993).

Cited in Jones v. Helms, 452 U.S. 412, 101 S. Ct. 2434, 69 L. Ed. 2d 118 (1981); Francis v. Pittman, 162 Ga. App. 40, 290 S.E.2d 288 (1982).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 23 Am. Jur. 2d, Desertion and Nonsupport, § 72.

C.J.S.

- 41 C.J.S., Husband and Wife, § 214 et seq., 67A C.J.S, Parent and Child, § 73. 82 C.J.S., Statutes, § 486 et seq.

U.L.A.

- Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (1958 Act) (U.L.A.) § 42.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 19-11-40

Total Results: 6  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Brookins v. Brookins, 357 S.E.2d 77 (Ga. 1987).

Cited 27 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 24, 1987 | 257 Ga. 205

...Wilson, District Attorney, Sheita Connors, Assistant District Attorney, for appellant. *209 John L. Blandford, for appellee. MARSHALL, Chief Justice. In the appellant-mother's present action against the appellee-father under the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA), OCGA § 19-11-40 et seq., she alleged that the defendant was under a duty to support the parties' minor children under the parties' 1974 Ohio divorce decree, under which the defendant was allegedly in arrears in the amount of $27,534.86 as of May 31, 1985....
Copy

State of Ga. v. McKenna, 315 S.E.2d 885 (Ga. 1984).

Cited 15 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | May 22, 1984 | 253 Ga. 6

...Decided May 22, 1984. Kathleen A. Buchanan, Assistant District Attorney, for appellant. McVay & Stubbs, Kipling L. McVay, for appellee. CLARKE, Justice. This case involves an interpretation of the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA), OCGA § 19-11-40 et seq., in an interstate proceeding....
Copy

Parker v. Parker, 293 Ga. 300 (Ga. 2013).

Cited 11 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jul 1, 2013 | 745 S.E.2d 605, 2013 Fulton County D. Rep. 2037

...The older child lived with Appellee/Father in Alaska. The petition in O’Quinn was brought under the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, which was replaced, with respect to proceedings filed on or after January 1,1998, by the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (Georgia Code Title 19, Ch. 11, Art. 3). See OCGA§ 19-11-40.1. Neither does the worksheet for the older child. Appellee acknowledges the final order should be amended to correct this factual error.
Copy

Brown v. Georgia Dep't of Human Resources, 428 S.E.2d 81 (Ga. 1993).

Cited 11 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Apr 12, 1993 | 263 Ga. 53, 93 Fulton County D. Rep. 1599

...and, during that period of time, appellant did not pay any child support to appellee on behalf of the child. In July of 1991, the Georgia Department of Human Resources (DHR) pursuant to the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA), OCGA § 19-11-40 et seq., filed a petition for support on behalf of appellee seeking a modification of child support and payment of various arrearages in child support, including the support that was not paid from June 23, 1985 to July 1988....
Copy

Riersgard v. Morton, 267 Ga. 451 (Ga. 1997).

Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 21, 1997 | 479 S.E.2d 748, 97 Fulton County D. Rep. 204

...side the judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction averring that he had never resided or owned property in Georgia. Relying on the fact that Riersgard had filed a complaint pursuant to the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA), OCGA § 19-11-40 et seq., in Nevada, which was later transferred to Georgia, the court denied the motion and refused to set aside the judgment....
Copy

Prince v. Mitchell, 257 Ga. 30 (Ga. 1987).

Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Apr 9, 1987 | 354 S.E.2d 422

...eir actions in Tennessee, is inapposite. First, Aikens was decided prior to Michigan v. Doran, supra, and it is questionable whether the holding in Aikens remains valid. Second, Aikens involved the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, OCGA § 19-11-40 et seq., which specifically provides for interstate extradition of persons failing to comply with child support obligations....