A Georgia judge can shape a jury’s verdict into a decree that actually works. A judge cannot change what the jury decided.
Shaping, Not Rewriting
OCGA 19-5-13 directs that a jury’s verdict dividing property “shall be carried into effect by the court by entering such judgment or decree or taking such other steps as are usual in the exercise of the court’s equitable powers to execute effectually and fully the jury’s verdict.”
In Fanning v. Fanning, 265 Ga. 523 (1995), a jury awarded the wife $40,000 “to be paid as [her] portion of retirement plans,” and the foreperson explained that the parties were to choose between a cash payment and a rollover. The decree ordered cash within six months. The Georgia Supreme Court vacated it. The trial court was “authorized to shape the verdict to reflect the jury’s intent in accordance with the pleadings and the evidence, but did not have the authority to write a verdict different from that returned by the jury.”
Fanning adds that the fix has to come from the record. An affidavit from the jury foreperson about what the jury meant could not support amending the judgment.
Both Sides of the Line in One Case
In Metzler v. Metzler, 267 Ga. 892 (1997), a jury set yearly alimony figures to be paid in twelve equal installments, and the decree restated them as monthly amounts. That was allowed, because it “properly effectuates the substance of the jury’s verdict.” The decree also ended alimony on the wife’s remarriage, which was allowed because OCGA 19-6-5(b) does that by statute unless the verdict says otherwise.
Then the decree added that alimony would end if she cohabited with someone. That was reversed. No statute supplies it, and the parties had never agreed to it.
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!