Court Opinion

ID: 9610857
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 03:48:08.062879+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:03:05.518402
License: Public Domain

Hill, Justice,
concurring specially.
Appellant’s application for contempt for nonpayment of alimony was made after final judgment of divorce awarding permanent alimony. Although Code Ann. § 81A-113 regarding counterclaims and cross claims does not expressly say so, it stands to reason that a party may not assert a counterclaim or cross claim after final *838judgment has been entered and the prevailing party takes action to enforce that judgment. I do not consider this decision to restrict the liberal construction to be given the Civil Practice Act.
If the rule were otherwise, a husband could decline to pay alimony or child support so as to precipitate an application for contempt upon which a counterclaim for modification could be based. This would encourage nonpayment and deprivation of those entitled by the judgment to receive such payments. Although economy of judicial time would be served by allowing counterclaims to applications for contempt, the parties then being before the court, neither judicial economy nor the Civil Practice Act should be used so as to encourage disregard of court orders.
I concur in the judgment. I am authorized to state that Justice Ingram joins in this special concurrence.