O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 19-11-63 (2019)

Order of support or reimbursement

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If the court of the responding state finds a duty of support, it may order the respondent to furnish support and to pay arrearages due under any existing court order or to furnish reimbursement for reasonable expenses actually incurred in the absence of a court order and may subject the property of the respondent to such order.

History

Ga. L. 1958, p. 34, § 19; Ga. L. 1979, p. 941, § 2.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Reimbursement should be based upon expenses incurred in supporting child. - Amount of reimbursement awarded a parent should be based on evidence submitted to the superior court setting forth expenses incurred by her in supporting the child. Hethcox v. Hethcox, 146 Ga. App. 430, 246 S.E.2d 444, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2392 (1978). Arrearages only recoverable after amendment by Ga. L. 1979, p. 941, §§ 1, 2. - Arrearages were not specifically recoverable under the Georgia Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-11-40 et seq., until O.C.G.A. §§ 19-11-51 and 19-11-63 were

amended by Ga. L. 1979, p. 941, §§ 1, 2. State ex rel. Brookins v. Brookins, 257 Ga. 205, 357 S.E.2d 77, 1987 Ga. LEXIS 790 (1987). Effect of order under URESA in subsequent arrearage action. - An order rendered by a responding court in a Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-11-40 et seq., proceeding is not res judicata in a subsequent action for arrearage under the original support order, subject to a setoff of any such arrearages already paid to prevent a double recovery. State ex rel. Brookins v. Brookins, 257 Ga. 205, 357 S.E.2d 77, 1987 Ga. LEXIS 790 (1987).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 23 Am. Jur. 2d, Desertion and Nonsupport, §§ 78, 81. 73 Am. Jur. 2d, Support of Persons, § 29. C.J.S. 67A C.J.S., Parent and Child, § 217 et seq.

U.L.A. Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (1958 Act) (U.L.A.) § 24. ALR. Constitutionality of statute providing for seizure of property of absent husband or parent, for benefit of wife or child, 65

A.L.R. 886. Right to credit on child support payments for social security or other govern-

ment dependency payments made for benefit of child, 34 A.L.R.5th 447.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1990–1996 · leading case: Weaver v. Chester, 393 S.E.2d 715 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Weaver v. Chester, 393 S.E.2d 715 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “) OCGA § 19-11-63. We must agree with the appellant that the Legislature could not have intended to give out-of-state custodians of minor children a greater entitlement to recover child support from Georgia parents than is enjoyed by custodians who are residents of this state.”

Dep't of Human Resources v. Pruitt, 476 S.E.2d 764 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “Consequently, in this case, the Georgia trial court must make its own determination, after applying Georgia law, as to whether Pruitt owes a duty of support. If the Georgia trial court finds such a duty, then it must make its own decision as to what amount of support Pruitt must…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.