Reynolds v. Reynolds
Annotate this CaseHusband-appellee Rex Reynolds filed for divorce from appellant-Wife Dorothy Reynolds, alleging that she was a non-resident of Georgia, and that she could be served by publication. Husband subsequently filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings and served Wife with this motion at her last known address in Barnesville. Thereafter, the court granted Husband’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and entered a final judgment and decree of divorce between the parties. Several months later, Wife, proceeding pro se, filed a verified motion to set aside the final judgment and decree of divorce, contending that Husband did not practice due diligence for service by publication; Husband knew at the time he filed his complaint that Wife resided within Georgia; and Husband committed a fraud upon the court by alleging that Wife was a non-resident. Husband, proceeding pro se, filed a response, in which he stated that Wife was located “mostly in Jones County,” and her non-resident status in his complaint and affidavit was a “typo.” He further questioned how Wife could be deemed a non-resident when her address was in Barnesville. Wife appeared pro se for a hearing on her motion to set aside and was instructed by the court to seek the assistance of counsel. Wife subsequently appeared with counsel for a hearing on her motion to set aside, but no hearing was held. Instead, the court issued an order denying Wife’s motion to set aside. After its review, the Supreme Court concluded the trial court erred in granting Husband's judgment of divorce based on an insufficient affidavit of service. The judgment was reversed and the matter remanded for further proceedings.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.