Brevet v. Brevet
| Decision Date | 14 December 1942 |
| Docket Number | Gen. No. 42180. |
| Citation | 45 N.E.2d 199,316 Ill.App. 406 |
| Parties | BREVET v. BREVET. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Superior Court, Cook County; Rudolph F. Desort, Judge.
Action for divorce between Marie Ann Brevet, now Marie Ann Custard, against Henri Brevet, wherein a decree of divorce was entered, and wherein the defendant filed a petition asking the court to enforce its decree of divorce respecting settlement of property rights between the parties.From an order granting relief prayed for, the plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Edgar J. Cook, of Chicago, for appellant.
Lord, Bissell & Kadyk, of Chicago (L. Duncan Lloyd, of Chicago, of counsel), for appellee.
Defendant, Henri Brevet, filed a petition asking the court to enforce its decree of divorce respecting settlement of property rights between the parties.Plaintiff moved to dismiss the petition, which motion was denied; she elected to abide by her motion and an order was entered granting the relief prayed for, and from this she appeals.
The decree of divorce entered December 21, 1940, found that the parties had made a property settlement as shown by a written agreement, made a part of the decree.The agreement, among other things, provided that each of the parties should have, independently of the claim of the other party, all real property belonging to him or her and now in his or her possession, or which may thereafter belong to him or her.Plaintiff also released her husband and his estate of any and all claims.Also it was agreed that each party should, upon request, execute to the other any instrument that the other party may reasonably require for the purpose of giving full force and effect to the provisions of the agreement.
The petition, filed by defendant on September 18, 1941, referred to the decree of divorce theretofore entered and the property agreement; asserted that prior to the time plaintiff had filed her complaint for divorce the petitioner had entered into a contract for the purchase of certain real estate in the village of Golf, Cook county, Illinois; that the purchase price of this was $18,700; that petitioner made all payments, both of principal and interest, as they fell due under the terms of the contract, making total payments of $4,400--the balance of the purchase price to be paid at the rate of $100 a month; that plaintiff at no time, either before or after the decree of divorce, paid or offered to pay any part of the purchase price of the real estate; that when the settlement agreement was made, petitioner, the defendant, was in possession of the real estate and plaintiff was not in possession of any part of it; that in the discussions between plaintiff and her counselprior to entering into the agreement plaintiff stated she had no interest in this real estate and did not want any part of it.The petition also recited the agreement whereby plaintiff became bound to deliver to the petitioner any instruments required under the terms of the agreement; that although requested to execute a quitclaim to the real estate, she has refused to do so and asserts that she claims an interest in the premises.The petition asked the court to find that plaintiff had no interest in the premises or in the contract for its purchase; that she may be adjudged guilty of contempt for her refusal to comply with the terms of the decree theretofore entered; that she be ordered to deliver to the petitioner an appropriate instrument conveying to the petitioner all her apparent interest in the premises, and upon her failure so to do a master in chancery be designated by the court to execute such an instrument.There was also a request that the petitioner be awarded all his costs and expenses incurred in the proceeding.
The court, after denying plaintiff's motion that the petition be dismissed and granting the petitioner the relief he sought, appointed a master in chancery to execute an instrument of conveyance of the real estate in the event of the refusal of plaintiff to execute and deliver such an instrument.It was also ordered that defendant recover from plaintiff his costs, taxed in the sum of $200.
Plaintiff appealing first argues that the Superior Court had no jurisdiction of the subject matter of the petition; that the court in such cases does not exercise general equity powers but merely those powers vested in it by the Divorce Act.Section 17 of the Divorce Act(Ill.Rev.Stats. ch. 40, par. 18) provides that when a divorce is granted and it appears that either party holds property equitably belonging to the other, the court may compel conveyance thereof be made to the party entitled to the same; also section 6,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marriage of Peacock, In re
...for a moment.' " Tegtmeyer v. Tegtmeyer, 292 Ill.App. 434, 443, 11 N.E. (2d) 657, 661 [ (1937) ], as quoted in Brevet v. Brevet, 316 Ill.App. 406, 45 N.E. (2d) 199 [ (1942) ]. Robinson v. Robinson, 37 Wash.2d 511, 516, 225 P.2d 411 (1950). We conclude the court here had authority to allocat......
-
Lippincott v. Lippincott
...all things necessary for the proper administration of justice and equity within the scope of their jurisdiction.' In Brevet v. Brevet, 316 Ill.App. 406, 45 N.E.2d 199, 200, where subsequent to decree plaintiff filed a petition in the original action for enforcement of the decree and like co......
-
Robinson v. Robinson
...reciprocal rights and obligations as set forth therein were definite, binding on the parties, and merged in the decree. Brevet v. Brevet, 316 Ill.App. 406, 45 N.E.2d 199. Unless that be so, the trial court failed to carry out mandate of the statute to '* * * make all necessary provisions as......
-
Whittier v. Whittier
... ... incorporated therein. See 3 Schouler on Marriage and Divorce, ... 6th Ed., 2020, section 1870, page 2032, section 1884; Brevet ... v. Brevet, 316 Ill.App. 406, 45 N.W.2d 199; Ward v. Ward, 156 ... Ore. 686, 68 P.2d 763, 765, 69 P.2d 963 ... The decree, ... ...