FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   802   803   804   805   806   807   808   809   810   811   812   813   814   815   816   817   818   819   820   821   822   823   824   825   826  
827   828   829   830   831   832   833   834   835   836   837   838   839   840   841   842   843   844   845   846   847   848   849   850   851   >>   >|  
urning to Connecticut, the first wife, joining the second wife and the administrator of his estate as defendants, petitioned a Connecticut court for a declaratory judgment. After having placed upon the first wife the burden of proving that the decedent had not acquired a _bona fide_ domicile in Nevada, and after giving proper weight to the claims of power by the Nevada court, the Connecticut court concluded that the evidence sustained the contentions of the first wife; and in so doing, it was upheld by the Supreme Court. The cases of Sherrer _v._ Sherrer, 334 U.S. 343 (1948) and Coe _v._ Coe, 334 U.S. 378 (1948), previously discussed, were declared not to be in point; inasmuch as no personal service was made upon the first wife, nor did she in any way participate in the Nevada proceedings. She was not, therefore, precluded from challenging the finding of the Nevada court that the decedent was, at the time of the divorce, domiciled in that State.[70] STATE OF THE LAW TODAY: QUAERE Upon summation one may speculate as to whether the doctrine of divisible divorce, as developed by Justice Douglas in Estin _v._ Estin, 334 U.S. 541 (1948), has not become the prevailing standard for determining the enforceability of foreign divorce decrees. If such be the case, it may be tenable to assert that an _ex parte_ divorce, founded upon acquisition of domicile by one spouse in the State which granted it, is effective to destroy the marital status of both parties in the State of domiciliary origin and probably in all other States and therefore to preclude subsequent prosecutions for bigamy, but not to alter rights as to property, alimony, or custody of children in the State of domiciliary origin of a spouse who was neither served nor personally appeared. DECREES AWARDING ALIMONY, CUSTODY OF CHILDREN Resulting as a by-product of divorce litigation are decrees for the payment of alimony, judgments for accrued and unpaid instalments of alimony, and judicial awards of the custody of children, all of which necessitate application of the full faith and credit clause when extrastate enforcement is sought for them. Thus a judgment in State A for alimony in arrears and payable under a prior judgment of separation which is not by its terms conditional, nor subject by the law of State A to modification or recall, and on which execution was directed to issue, is entitled to recognition in the forum State. Although an obligation for accr
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   802   803   804   805   806   807   808   809   810   811   812   813   814   815   816   817   818   819   820   821   822   823   824   825   826  
827   828   829   830   831   832   833   834   835   836   837   838   839   840   841   842   843   844   845   846   847   848   849   850   851   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

divorce

 

Nevada

 
alimony
 

Connecticut

 

judgment

 

Sherrer

 

custody

 
children
 

domiciliary

 

origin


decrees

 

spouse

 

domicile

 

decedent

 
founded
 

acquisition

 

granted

 

States

 

DECREES

 

appeared


personally

 

served

 
effective
 
destroy
 
bigamy
 

property

 
rights
 

prosecutions

 
parties
 
status

marital
 

preclude

 
subsequent
 
AWARDING
 

awards

 

conditional

 
subject
 
separation
 

arrears

 
payable

modification

 

recall

 

Although

 

obligation

 

recognition

 

entitled

 
execution
 

directed

 
payment
 

judgments