Reconciling cancels what a separated Georgia spouse was awarded. It does not cancel what the children were awarded.
One Instrument, Two Results
Kiser v. Kiser, 214 Ga. 402 (1958), shows how sharply the line is drawn. A separated husband deeded property to his wife in settlement of claims for support and alimony for both the wife and the children. The parties later resumed living together, and the husband sued to cancel the deed.
The Georgia Supreme Court held he could not. “The subsequent cohabitation of a husband and wife, while annulling and setting aside all provisions made for permanent alimony for the wife, does not affect the rights of children under any deed of separation or voluntary provisions for alimony.” The deed could not be cancelled as a conveyance for the children’s support even though the reconciliation had annulled it as to the wife.
Brown v. Brown, 210 Ga. 233 (1953), came out the same way on a decree rather than a deed. A single 1944 judgment awarded the wife permanent alimony and awarded the son weekly support and a remainder interest in two lots. After nine years of on-and-off cohabitation the wife’s half was gone and the son’s half was not.
What Reconciling Can Change
A parent who actually resumes supporting the children is not made to pay twice. In Wright v. Wright, 205 Ga. 524 (1949), a mother kept issuing executions on an old child alimony judgment while all three children lived in the father’s home and were supported by him. The Georgia Supreme Court held he had stated a claim for an accounting, reasoning that “[t]he purpose of the alimony judgment was to insure the support of the children, and as long as the husband actually furnishes such support he should at least be credited with whatever money is actually paid therefor.”
Contact Us
This post is a quick overview of the law and is not intended as legal advice. Please feel free to contact our office for a consultation if you have questions about this or any other legal aspects regarding your case!