A spouse who took part in a divorce and lived under the decree can be barred from later claiming the court had no power to enter it.
The Rule
Doke v. Doke, 248 Ga. 514 (1981), applies language from Williams v. Pique, 234 Ga. 344 (1975): “though the parties cannot confer jurisdiction on the court, where the record shows that the parties affirmatively conceded and confirmed the jurisdiction of the court with respect to the person and the subject matter, and the court rendered a divorce decree in the case, neither party can thereafter attack the decree as being void for lack of jurisdiction over the person or the subject matter.”
What Happened in Doke
The couple married in 1972 and had two children. They later found out the wife’s divorce from her first husband had never actually been obtained. She got that decree in November 1975, and the parties separated the same day.
She filed for divorce eleven days later. The husband never answered, but he signed a settlement agreement covering custody, child support, and alimony, and it went into the final decree that December. He knew about her prior marriage when he signed it.
Five years later, after she garnished his employer for child support arrears, he moved to set the whole decree aside as void, arguing there had never been a valid marriage to dissolve. The trial court agreed with him.
The Georgia Supreme Court reversed, holding he was “estopped from denying the validity of the divorce decree.”
The Practical Point
Timing and conduct matter. The husband in Doke had gone along with the decree, entered a consent modification of custody under it, and raised the problem only when he was asked to pay.
The Court also noted that whatever the state of the marriage, he was still under an enforceable obligation to support his children.
Contact Us
This post is a quick overview of the law and is not intended as legal advice. Please feel free to contact our office for a consultation if you have questions about this or any other legal aspects regarding your case!