Case Name: NOLAN v. MOORE
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1978-04-04
Citations: 241 Ga. 156
Docket Number: 33366
Parties: NOLAN v. MOORE.
Judges: All the Justices concur, except Bowles, J., who concurs specially, and Hill, J., who dissents.
Reporter: Georgia Reports
Volume: 241
Pages: 156–158

Head Matter:
33366.
NOLAN v. MOORE.
Argued March 14, 1978
Decided April 4, 1978.
John A. Sibley, III, for appellant.

Opinion:
Undercofler, Presiding Justice.
Joan Nolan appeals the dismissal of her contempt action against her former husband for failure to pay "reasonable child support . in accordance with his financial status at that time [whenever the daughter chose to live with her mother after her mother became employed or her father remarried]. . ." The trial court dismissed the action on the husband's motion that this language is too vague to be enforceable, and thus inappropriate for contempt. The wife appeals. We reverse.
The trial court often must construe the agreement and decree in order to determine the contempt issue before it. Berman v. Berman, 239 Ga. 443 (238 SE2d 27) (1977). We held, in Hunnicutt v. Sandison, 223 Ga. 301 (154 SE2d 587) (1967), that the failure to pay "necessary and reasonable expenses for the support, maintenance and education" of the child as incorporated in a divorce decree subjected the husband to contempt. In Booker v. Booker, 219 Ga. 358 (133 SE2d 353) (1963), the trial court could enforce by contempt a decree providing for payment of "living and maintenance expenses." We find that the language presented in this case is similar. Therefore, we conclude that the trial court erred in holding "reasonable child support... in accordance wdth his financial status..." too vague to be enforceable. The petition for contempt stated a claim for relief. The alleged filing of an action for the award of child support pursuant to Code Ann. § 30-301, after the judgment, but prior to the filing of the notice of appeal in this case, does not moot the appeal. The motion to dismiss is denied.
Judgment reversed.
All the Justices concur, except Bowles, J., who concurs specially, and Hill, J., who dissents.
Jack P. Turner, for appellee.