Lawing v. Erwin
Docket: 39659
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia; June 6, 1983; Georgia; State Supreme Court
William Lawing and his former wife, appellee, were involved in a legal dispute regarding a 1976 judgment that modified Lawing's child support obligations following their divorce in 1973. In 1982, the appellee sought an increase in child support, but a jury found no grounds for such an increase. Subsequently, she filed a motion for a new trial, which included a challenge to the validity of the 1976 judgment, claiming there was no supporting evidence for it. The trial court denied the motion for a new trial but ruled that the 1976 judgment was void on its face. Lawing appealed, arguing that the challenge to the 1976 judgment should not have been considered in a motion for a new trial of a separate case and that the ruling declaring the judgment void was erroneous. The Supreme Court of Georgia reiterated that a judgment can only be collaterally attacked if it is void on its face, as per OCGA § 9-11-60. A judgment is deemed void on its face if there is a non-amendable defect visible in the record, and the pleadings show no legal claim existed. The court found that appellee's argument—that the 1976 judgment was void due to insufficient evidence—was invalid, as insufficient evidence cannot be the basis for a collateral attack. The appellee did not argue any procedural defects such as lack of jurisdiction or notice. Thus, since the 1976 judgment appeared regular on its face, it was presumed supported by sufficient evidence and conclusive regarding the subject matter it addressed. The court concluded that the trial court erred by allowing the collateral attack on the 1976 judgment within the context of the new trial motion. Consequently, the ruling declaring the 1976 order null and void was reversed. All Justices concurred except for Justice Gregory, who did not participate.