McCarthy v. Ashment-McCarthy

Husband Joseph McCarthy filed an application for discretionary appeal, following the trial court's denial of his motion to set aside a final decree regarding his divorce from Wife Annie Ashment-McCarthy. Following a pre-trial hearing, the financial agreement reached by the parties was read into the record along with the trial court's decisions on any remaining contested issues regarding custody. Husband and Wife stated under oath that they were in agreement with all financial decisions, and Husband did not object to the trial court's rulings on custody. At that time, Husband and Wife also agreed to file letter briefs and submit the issue of attorney fees to the trial court's discretion. Thereafter, Husband fired his counsel, and, before the divorce decree was entered, he began to argue that the parties had not reached an agreement. Wife filed a motion to enforce the agreement and for contempt, and the trial court dealt with all of these matters in the Decree, which granted both the motion to enforce and for contempt and ultimately awarding Wife $2,550 in attorney fees (that award related only to Wife's costs in bringing the motion to enforce). After considering Wife's letter brief on the issue of attorney fees relating to the general divorce action, the trial court entered an order granting Wife $12,580. Husband, still pro se, then filed a motion to set aside the Decree as well as a motion for new trial, and an amended motion to set aside. Husband's motion for new trial contained no grounds at all, and his motion to set aside, as amended, contended that the parties never reached a valid agreement and that Wife had defrauded the trial court by misrepresenting her finances. OCGA 19–6–15 mandated that certain findings must be made in writing by the trial court prior to any deviation in statutory child support. Husband did not raise the issue of the trial court's compliance with the statute in either of his motions. As such, his argument with respect to compliance with the statute was deemed by the Supreme Court as having been raised for the first time on appeal. As a result, Husband waived review of the issue. Husband's main argument, both at trial and in his appeal, challenged the two awards of attorney fees to Wife. Husband argued that, with respect to both awards, the trial court failed to include appropriate findings of fact. Based on this specific set of facts, the Supreme Court vacated the trial court's award of fees for failing to make the required findings of fact. The Court concluded Husband's other challenges lacked merit. View "McCarthy v. Ashment-McCarthy" on Justia Law