Grissom v. Grissom
Supreme Court of Georgia
1DissentCarley, Justice
Whatever the rule may be in other states, the law of Georgia “is well settled [that] one who has accepted benefits such as alimony under a divorce decree is estopped from seeking to set aside that decree without first returning the benefits. [Cits.]” White v. White, 274 Ga. 884, 885 (1) (561 SE2d 801) (2002). If the Court had applied this clearly established principle in this case, Wife would have been estopped from attacking the divorce decree, because she has accepted, but not returned, benefits that were awarded to her thereunder. However, the three-Justice plurality opinion, p. 268, finds…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Hall v. HopperSupreme Court of Georgia · 1975
- Etkind v. SuarezSupreme Court of Georgia · 1999
- Coley v. ColeySupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 2006
- Thompson v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.