O.C.G.A. § 19-5-12 (2019)
Form of judgment and decree
(a) A final judgment of divorce shall be prepared so as to conform to the pleadings and the evidence and may restore a maiden or prior name, if requested. It shall be prepared in form substantially as follows: “FINAL JUDGMENT AND DECREE Upon consideration of this case, upon evidence submitted as provided by law, it is the judgment of the court that a total divorce be granted, that is to say, a divorce a vinculo matrimonii, between the parties to the above stated case upon legal principles. It is considered, ordered, and decreed by the court that the marriage contract heretofore entered into between the parties to this case, from and after this date, be and is set aside and dissolved as fully and effectually as if no such contract had ever been made or entered into. Petitioner and Respondent in the future shall be held and considered as separate and distinct individuals altogether unconnected by any nuptial union or civil contract whatsoever and both shall have the right to remarry. Decree and order entered this .
day of , Judge, Superior Court”
(b) When applicable, any one or more of the following clauses shall be included in the form of the judgment: The court restores to (Petitioner/Respondent) his/her prior or maiden name, to wit: . The court awards custody of the children of the parties as follows: . The court fixes alimony as follows: .
(c) In any case which involves the determination of child support, the form of the judgment shall also include all of the information set forth in paragraph (2) of subsection (c) of Code Section 19-6-15. The final judgment shall have attached to it the child support worksheet containing the calculation of the final award of child support and any schedule that was prepared for the purpose of calculating the amount of child support. The final judgment shall specify a sum certain amount of child support to be paid.
(d) When applicable, the court shall also include in the final judgment the ability to use income deduction orders as set forth in Code Sections 19-6-30 and 19-6-32.
History
Laws 1802, Cobb’s 1851 Digest, p. 224; Code 1863, § 3484; Code 1868, § 3507; Code 1873, § 3565; Code 1882, § 3565; Civil Code 1895, § 2438; Civil Code 1910, § 2957; Code 1933, § 30-116; Ga. L. 1946, p. 90, § 9; Ga. L. 1979, p. 466, § 4; Ga. L. 1995, p. 603, § 1; Ga. L. 1996, p. 453, § 5; Ga. L. 1999, p. 81, § 19; Ga. L. 2005, p. 224, § 4/HB 221; Ga. L. 2006, p. 583, § 3/SB 382; Ga. L. 2017, p. 646, § 1-1/SB 137.
Annotations
Cross references. Recording of marriage licenses in vital records, § 31-10-21. Provision for collection of child support by continuing garnishment for support, § 19-6-30. Editor’s notes. Ga. L. 1995, p. 603, § 4, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that it is the intention of Sections 1 and 2 of that Act to encourage judges in divorce cases to require all couples involved in contested
divorces to go to mediation to attempt a mutually agreeable settlement. Ga. L. 2005, p. 224, § 1/HB 221, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: “The General Assembly finds and declares that it is important to assess periodically child support guidelines and determine whether existing guidelines continue to be viable and effective or whether they have failed or ceased to accomplish their original policy objectives. The General Assembly further finds that supporting Georgia’s children is vitally important to the citizens of Georgia. Therefore, the General Assembly has determined that it is in the best interests of the state and its citizenry to undertake an evaluation of the child support guidelines on a continuing basis. The General Assembly declares that it is important that all of Georgia’s children are provided with adequate financial support whether the children’s parents are living together or not living together. The General Assembly
finds that both parents have a continuing obligation with respect to providing financial and emotional stability for their child or children. It is the hope of the members of the General Assembly that all parents work together to advance the best interest of their children.” Ga. L. 2006, p. 583, § 10(b)/SB 382, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: “Sections 1 through 7 of this Act shall become effective on January 1, 2007, and shall apply to all pending civil actions on or after January 1, 2007.” Law reviews. For note on the 1995 amendment of this
Code section, see 12 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 169 (1995). For article, “Alimony and Child Support: Limit Issuance or Renewal of Licenses for Failure to Comply with Child Support Order,” see 13 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 127 (1996). For article on 2005 amendment of this Code section, see 22 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 73 (2005). For article on 2006 amendment of this Code section, see 23 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 103 (2006).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Decree fixing status of parties treated as judgment quasi in rem. So far as the adjudication fixes the status of the parties, the judgment concludes both parties and strangers; but, beyond the adjudication of the status, the decree does not conclude strangers. McDonald v. McDonald, 232 Ga. 190, 205 S.E.2d 850, 1974 Ga. LEXIS 904 (1974). Verdict construed as for plaintiff when form fails to specify. - When both parties to a divorce suit introduced evidence in support of their respective prayers for divorce, and the jury returned a verdict in the form prescribed by law, without stating whether the verdict was for the plaintiff or the defendant, the verdict would be construed to be for the plaintiff. Gardner v. Gardner, 206 Ga. 669, 58 S.E.2d 416, 1950 Ga. LEXIS 555 (1950); Fried v. Fried, 208 Ga. 861, 69 S.E.2d 862, 1952 Ga. LEXIS 373 (1952); Newman v. Newman, 223 Ga. 278, 154 S.E.2d 581, 1967 Ga. LEXIS 497 (1967). Verdict for plaintiff is not concurrent with one for defendant and decree based upon nonconcurrent verdicts is void, and should be set aside on proper motion. Hyde v. Hyde, 200 Ga. 635, 38 S.E.2d 287, 1946 Ga. LEXIS 314 (1946). Judgment not set aside when language used substantially conforms to section. - Verdict and judgment which was not couched in the exact language contained in the statute but the language used was substantially the same, the ver-
dict was not subject to being set aside. De Gouras v. De Gouras, 205 Ga. 362, 53 S.E.2d 759, 1949 Ga. LEXIS 378 (1949). Incorporation of custody judgment in divorce decree. - When custody is decided by juvenile court, it is unnecessary to incorporate custody judgment in divorce decree. Saade v. Saade, 238 Ga. 620, 234 S.E.2d 530, 1977 Ga. LEXIS 1139 (1977). Decree should accurately reflect a settlement reached by the parties; therefore, the trial court cannot be allowed to make substantive additions in voluntary agreements made before the court. Robinson v. Robinson, 261 Ga. 330, 404 S.E.2d 435, 1991 Ga. LEXIS 237 (1991). Substantially conforming to agreement. - Although a spouse alleged on appeal that a motion to set aside that portion of the divorce decree which dealt with the issue of child support, which incorporated the parties’ settlement agreement, was properly granted because the decree failed to set forth a specific baseline dollar amount for child support, as required by O.C.G.A. § 19-5-12, the decree contained stated dollar amounts which could be considered baseline payments; hence, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 196-15 as applicable at the time, the trial court properly found that the spouse was liable for paying child support for two children in the range of 23 to 28 percent of the spouse’s gross income. Scott v. Scott, 282 Ga. 36, 644 S.E.2d 842, 2007 Ga. LEXIS 348 (2007).
RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 24 Am. Jur. 2d, Divorce and Separation, §§ 357, 358, 361, 362. C.J.S. 27A C.J.S., Divorce, § 345 et seq. ALR. Divorce decree as res judicata in respect of community property, 85 A.L.R. 339. Decree of divorce or annulment by court having jurisdiction as binding upon one not a party, as to facts adjudicated, 87 A.L.R. 203. Effect of failure of divorce decree to show whether divorce was granted to the husband or to the wife, 133 A.L.R. 556.
Remedy of party against whom preliminary decree for divorce is rendered in event of failure or refusal of prevailing party to request entry of final decree, 151 A.L.R. 849. Divorce decree as res judicata in independent action involving property settlement agreement, 32 A.L.R.2d 1145. Power of court to award absolute divorce in favor of party who desires only limited decree, or vice versa, 14 A.L.R.3d 703. Support provisions of judicial decree or order as limit of parent’s liability for expenses of child, 35 A.L.R.5th 757.