Williams v. Williams

Following his divorce from Leanne Williams (Wife), Christopher Williams (Husband) filed two motions: one to modify custody and reduce child support and another to hold Wife in contempt for violating Husband’s custody and visitation rights as set forth in the parties’ divorce decree. The motions were consolidated, and hearings were conducted on two separate dates. Following both hearings, the trial court, among other things, reduced Husband’s child support obligations, made certain alterations to visitation, and awarded $2,000 in attorney fees to Wife. In Case. No. S14A0510, Husband appealed the trial court’s ruling in his post-divorce action for modification of child custody and support, contending that the trial court erred by: (1) unduly limiting his new wife’s ability to drive his child from place to place; (2) failing to issue an amended parenting plan; and (3) failing to include in its order certain changes to the visitation schedule allegedly agreed upon by Husband and Wife. In Case No. S14A0512, with regard to the contempt action, Husband argued that the trial court erred by awarding $2,000 in attorney fees to Wife in the absence of sufficient evidence and findings to support the award. The Supreme Court found the trial court’s omission of a modification to custody and visitation required that its order be reversed with respect to this particular issue, and the trial court must reconsider the issue on remand. Further, there was no statutory basis given, no statutory language used, and no findings of fact presented on whether the trial court awarded Wife attorney's fees based on OCGA 19–9–3 (g) or some other statute. Under these circumstances, the Court vacated the award of attorney fees and remanded the case for both a statement of the statutory basis for the fees as well as any required supporting facts. View "Williams v. Williams" on Justia Law