On June 30, 2003, Gregory Wayne Scott Husband and Patti Rae Scott Wife entered into a separation agreement. As part of the agreement, each party acknowledged that he or she read and understood all of its terms, and the parties also stated that the separation agreement would be presented to the trial court during divorce proceedings for incorporation into a divorce decree. On July 2, 2003, Wife filed a complaint for divorce, and, on August 6, 2003, the trial court entered a final judgment and decree of divorce, incorporating the settlement agreement of the parties as requested. On November 25, 2003, the trial court entered an income deduction order. Husband neither objected to the divorce decree or the income deduction order, and he did not subsequently appeal either order. On September 22, 2005, Husband filed a motion, apparently pursuant to OCGA § 9-11-60 d 3, to set aside the divorce decree as to child support, contending that the final decree’s provisions regarding child support were “non-amendable defects on the face of the records and pleadings.”Specifically, Husband contended that: 1 the decree set forth child support as only a percentage of Husband’s income without setting forth a specific baseline dollar amount to be paid per week as required under OCGA § 19-5-12 and 2 the decree included a provision violating the principle that the right to receive child support belongs to the child and cannot be waived by the custodial parent. See Livsey v. Livsey , 229 Ga. 368 191 SE2d 859 1972. On July 31, 2006, the trial court granted the motion, setting aside the final decree with regard to only the issue of child support.
Wife now appeals, and, because Husband has failed to prove the existence of a non-amendable defect on the face of the record, we reverse.
