Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Any order of support issued by a court of this state when acting as a responding state shall not supersede any previous order of support issued in a divorce or separate maintenance action, but the amounts for a particular period paid pursuant to either order shall be credited against amounts accruing or accrued for the same period under both.
(Ga. L. 1958, p. 34, § 26.)
- Any order of support issued by a court of this state, entered in an action filed under the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-11-40 et seq., shall not supersede any previous order of support issued in divorce or separate maintenance action, and the latter order will not constitute a modification of the former order; thus, amounts for a particular period paid pursuant to either order shall be credited against amounts accruing or accrued for the same period under both. Ray v. Ray, 247 Ga. 467, 277 S.E.2d 495 (1981).
Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-11-40 et seq., order did not supersede divorce decree ordering child support. Bisno v. Biloon, 161 Ga. App. 351, 291 S.E.2d 66 (1982), overruled on other grounds, State ex rel. McKenna v. McKenna, 253 Ga. 6, 315 S.E.2d 885 (1984).
- Kentucky Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act order does not supersede a prior Georgia divorce decree ordering child support; and by the same token, the URESA order does not constitute a modification of the support order. Earley v. Earley, 165 Ga. App. 483, 300 S.E.2d 814 (1983).
- Under the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-11-40 et seq., the court having jurisdiction in the responding state makes an independent determination of a "fair and reasonable sum" irrespective of whether there is a prior decree; and if a different amount is ordered paid, the other judgment is not modified but the sums paid under either are credited to the other. State ex rel. McKenna v. McKenna, 253 Ga. 6, 315 S.E.2d 885 (1984); Baird v. Herrmann, 181 Ga. App. 579, 353 S.E.2d 75 (1987).
Cited in Francis v. Pittman, 162 Ga. App. 40, 290 S.E.2d 288 (1982); Department of Human Resources v. Pruitt, 223 Ga. App. 126, 476 S.E.2d 764 (1996).
- 23 Am. Jur. 2d, Desertion and Nonsupport, §§ 73, 81.
- 67A C.J.S., Parent and Child, § 217.
- Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (1958 Act) (U.L.A.) § 30.
- Construction and effect of provision of Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act that no support order shall supersede or nullify any other order, 31 A.L.R.4th 347.
Right to credit on child support payments for social security or other government dependency payments made for benefit of child, 34 A.L.R.5th 447.
Total Results: 2
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1987-06-24
Citation: 357 S.E.2d 77, 257 Ga. 205, 1987 Ga. LEXIS 790
Snippet: 885) (1984), we pointed out that, under OCGA § 19-11-71, URESA orders do not affect, and are not bound
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1984-05-22
Citation: 315 S.E.2d 885, 253 Ga. 6
Snippet: accrued for the same period under both." OCGA § 19-11-71. Under URESA a duty to support may be found in