Groover v. Groover

The husband was not entitled to a new trial in his divorce action after the trial court improperly allowed the wife to testify as to her attorneys' fees in front of the jury.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Lewis Madison Groover appeals from a jury verdict entered in his divorce from Suzanne Ferrell Groover. We affirm. The parties were married in 1973 and Husband filed for divorce in 2003. The parties resorted to a jury trial to resolve the monetary issues in their divorce. The jury awarded Wife $222,000 in lump sum alimony, payable over 15 years, the marital home, subject to an approximately $23,000 mortgage, the contents of the marital home, a car, and her separate property, which consisted of substantial assets inherited from her father. Husband was awarded acreage in Ludowici, Geogia, which had been purchased with marital funds, several trucks, farm equipment, and his separate property, which consisted of substantial assets inherited from his mother. The parties were each awarded their own retirement accounts. Husband was held responsible for about $91,000 in marital debt from a failed business venture and Wife was held responsible for about $6,500 in marital debt from retail credit cards. The trial court awarded Wife $50,000 in attorney’s fees. Husband’s application to appeal was granted under this Court’s Pilot Project.1

1. Husband contends that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of payments he voluntarily made to Wife after 1995 when he claimed the parties separated. Evidence of post-separation voluntary payments is inadmissible under McEachern v. McEachern .2 However, the parties disputed the date of separation and therefore this fact was for the jury to decide. The trial court instructed the jury that they were to decide when the separation occurred and were not to consider any payments made after that date. With the date of separation a matter of dispute, it was not error for the trial court to admit evidence of payments made prior to the date of separation as contended by Wife.

Groover v. Groover

The husband was not entitled to a new trial in his divorce action after the trial court improperly allowed the wife to testify as to her attorneys' fees in front of the jury.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report