Case Name: RIDLEY v. GRANDISON
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1990-03-09
Citations: 260 Ga. 6
Docket Number: S89A0510
Parties: RIDLEY v. GRANDISON.
Judges: All the Justices concur, except Weltner, Hunt, and Fletcher, JJ., who dissent.
Reporter: Georgia Reports
Volume: 260
Pages: 6–16

Head Matter:
S89A0510.
RIDLEY v. GRANDISON.
(389 SE2d 746)

Opinion:
Smith, Presiding Justice.
We granted the appellant's discretionary application, and we affirm. The appellant, Jerome Ridley, and the appellee, Mae Grandison, a/k/a Mae Ridley, met in Virginia in 1976. Sometime in 1979, the appellant moved into the appellee's apartment with the appellee and her son, and they resided there together for approximately six years.
In June 1985, the appellant moved to Macon and in December 1985, the appellant moved the appellee and her son to Macon. He claimed the moving expenses on his federal tax return; he claimed the appellee's son for federal and state income tax purposes; and filed taxes as head of household. Shortly after moving into their Macon home, the parties completed a credit application with a local furniture company. The application stated: "Whether or not married, you have the right to apply for credit separately from or jointly with your spouse or another person." The parties checked the box marked "married," and the appellee signed the application as "Mae Ridley." The parties obligated themselves for an amount in excess of five thousand dollars for the furniture they purchased with the approved credit application.
In 1988 the appellee filed a complaint for divorce; one of the grounds was adultery. In her complaint she alleged that she and the appellant had a common law marriage. The jury found that a common law marriage existed and awarded the parties a divorce. There was a division of property and liabilities on the property and the appellee was awarded alimony for three years.
After a hearing, the trial court found that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding and verdict and the appellant's motions for j.n.o.v. and new trial were denied.
There was evidence to support the jury's verdict in this case, and this Court will not disturb a verdict if there is any evidence to support the verdict. Horton v. Kitchens, 259 Ga. 446 (383 SE2d 871) (1989).
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur, except Weltner, Hunt, and Fletcher, JJ., who dissent.