FIRST DIVISION BARNES, P. J., BROWN and HODGES, JJ. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules June 28, 2022 In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A22A0428. BACKMAN v. BACKMAN. HODGES, Judge. In this divorce action, we are asked to decide whether the sponsor of an immigrant, pursuant to an I-864 Affidavit of Support,1 must provide financial support to the sponsored immigrant upon the parties’ divorce when the parties previously executed a prenuptial agreement that waives spousal support. In its order granting a husband’s petition for divorce, the Superior Court of Fulton County found that the husband’s I-864 affidavit, executed to provide support to his Colombian wife, was enforceable and ordered the husband to pay the wife $1,000 in support per month as a result. We granted the husband’s application for discretionary appeal to consider his argument that the trial court erred in awarding support to the wife because: (1) the 1 See 8 USC § 1183a at seq.; 8 CFR § 213a. parties waived spousal support in their prenuptial agreement; and (2) the wife’s income exceeded the limit for which additional support was required. These arguments raise issues of first impression in Georgia and, for the following reasons, we conclude that the trial court correctly found that the husband’s I-864 Affidavit of Support was enforceable despite the parties’ prenuptial agreement and divorce. However, the trial court imposed a support award that was not authorized by federal law due to the amount of the wife’s income. Therefore, we affirm in part and reverse in part. The underlying facts are generally undisputed. John Backman (“Husband”) and Catherine Backman a/k/a Catherine Otalvaro Cespedes (“Wife”) met through an online dating site in 2011. Thereafter, Husband visited Wife, who was a citizen of and resided in Colombia, on multiple occasions before proposing marriage.2 The couple wed in February 2013, but Wife did not have a visa to enter the United State and was 2 In December 2012, the parties executed a prenuptial agreement which provided, in relevant part, that “[e]ach party releases any right to claim temporary alimony, permanent alimony, rehabilitative alimony, periodic alimony, lump sum alimony, special equities, equitable distributions, remuneration, support, and attorney’s fees or costs” except as related to child support obligations. During the divorce proceedings, Husband moved to enforce the agreement; Wife filed responses in opposition to Husband’s motion, to which Husband replied. The trial court ultimately granted Husband’s motion. 2 unable to immediately join Husband. To expedite Wife’s arrival in the United States, Husband executed an I-864 Affidavit of Support pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act, in which he pledged to financially support Wife. See 8 USC § 1183a et seq.; 8 CFR § 213a. Wife then moved to the United States and is now a legal permanent resident. However, the couple’s relationship soured, and in July 2018, two months after the birth of their second child, Husband filed …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals