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