Collins v. Collins

Decision Date27 July 1948
Citation160 Fla. 732,36 So.2d 417
PartiesCOLLINS v. COLLINS.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; Ross Williams, Judge.

Reginald L. Williams, of Miami, for appellant.

R. P Terry, of Miami, for appellee.

ADAMS, Justice.

This appellant brought an action in Florida on a judgment entered in the State of New York. The basis of the foreign judgment was the accruals of alimony. When the accumulations reached $6850.00 a motion was made to the Supreme Court of New York to enter a final judgment for same. It is alleged in the declaration before us that the order for payment of alimony in the first instance by the New York Court was interlocutory; that when the last and final judgment was entered by the New York Court process was duly served on defendant; that said judgment was and is final, unpaid, unreversed and is entitled to full faith and credit.

A demurrer was sustained and upon entry of judgment plaintiff has appealed.

The first and controlling question submitted by both parties is whether the court erred in taking notice of the New York law. This record contains no allegations of the New York law. The lower court observed:

'* * * The Court finds under New York law the judgment herein sued on does not have the necessary characteristics to invoke comity and recognition of the same, and is not of the pattern to command full faith, credit and enforcement in this jurisdiction, * * *'.

There may be found some authority for a court to notice the law of a sister state. See Wigmore on Evidence, 2d Ed., Vol. 5, page 582 Sec. 2573, and Paine v. Schenectady Ins. Co., 11 R.I. 411. But by more than a score of cases covering the entire history of this court and without a single exception we have held consistent with the great weight of authority that foreign law is a fact to be plead and proven. See 20 Am.Jur., Evidence, page 70, Sec. 47; Tuten v. Gazan, 18 Fla. 751; Duke v. Taylor, 37 Fla. 64, 19 So. 172, 31 L.R.A. 484, 53 Am.St.Rep. 232; Cohen v. Cohen, 158 Fla. 802, 30 So.2d 307; Barnes v. Liebig, 146 Fla. 219, 1 So.2d 247 and a host of cases in the interim.

We can see no reason at this time to assume the insurmountable burden of ascertaining the statute and case law of each of the several states. If we did, the contention undoubtedly would be made that we should also take notice of the law of each sovereign nation. When the contrary has not been alleged we have assumed the law of the other state to be the same as our own. Our holdings are consistent with settled principles of law and have served the interest of our state well. We shall not extend or depart from them now.

This declaration contains an unqualified allegation that the judgment is final. If for any reason the New York law is not the same as ours in this respect the defendant should have the opportunity of pleading such facts. In the absence of a contrary showing we presume the New York law is the same as our own. Duke v. Taylor and Cohen v. Cohen, supra. If the New York law is the same is effect as ours it would seem that this is the kind of judgment our court would hold to be final. Robinson v. Robinson, 154 Fla. 464, 18 So.2d 29.

Our conclusion is that the declaration stated a cause of action and it was error to sustain the demurrer.

Reversed.

THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, SEBRING, BARNS and HOBSON, JJ., concur.

CHAPMAN, J., concurs specially.

CHAPMAN, Justice (concurring specially).

The appellant Theresa Collins, sued Clifford W. Collins in the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, and by her amended declaration, in part, alleged that the plaintiff-appellant was granted an absolute divorce from the defendant-appellee on June 13, 1935, in the Supreme Court of Otsego County, New York, and the divorce judgment ordered the husband to pay the sum of $50.00 per week for her support and the maintenance of the children of the parties. It is further alleged that a final judgment was obtained against the husband in the Supreme Court of Otsego County, New York, on January 31, 1947, a copy of which is attached to the declaration and identified as Exhibit C. The final judgment was obtained in the New York Court after due process of law and service of process upon the defendant-appellee, as required by said court in the said action then pending between the parties and the plaintiff recovered of and from the defendant a judgment in the sum of $6,850.00, together with $10.00 costs, and execution was directed to issue; that said judgment is a valid and subsisting final judgment of said court remaining in full force and effect and has not been reversed, set aside, satisfied, superseded or appealed from and that the appellee has not paid the sums of money, or any part thereof, and refuses so to do; that the judgment entered by the New York court is a final money judgment.

The defendant-appellee demurred to the amended declaration upon grounds: (1) the declaration fails to state a cause of action; (2) the declaration fails to allege that the judgment sued on was final and not subject to modification; (3) that the cause of action sued upon is not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Stone v. Wall
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • June 17, 1999
    ...had waived the application of Virginia law and that Florida law must apply. See Stone, 135 F.3d at 1441-42 (citing Collins v. Collins, 160 Fla. 732, 36 So.2d 417 (1948)). By our decision, we do not express an opinion as to whether under the "significant relationships" test enunciated in Bis......
  • Sun Life Assurance Co. of Can. v. Imperial Premium Fin., LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • September 18, 2018
    ...the contrary is not alleged, the law of the sister state will be assumed to be the same as Florida law.") (citing Collins v. Collins , 160 Fla. 732, 36 So.2d 417, 417 (1948) ); see also Bethell v. Peace , 441 F.2d 495, 497 (5th Cir. 1971) ("[T]he party relying on foreign law must plead and ......
  • Scholla v. Scholla, 11267
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • January 8, 1953
    ...can only return to the issuing jurisdiction and seek a judgment or decree in gross on the accrued amounts there. Cf. Collins v. Collins, 1948, 160 Fla. 732, 36 So.2d 417. It may be necessary for her again to serve her ex-husband with process. In any event, she must at least give him notice ......
  • Bennett v. Gibson
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 14, 1987
    ...Sistare v. Sistare, 218 U.S. 1, 30 S.Ct. 682, 686, 54 L.Ed. 905, 28 L.R.A., N.S., 1068, 20 Ann.Cas. 1061 [1910]; Collins v. Collins, 160 Fla. 732, 36 So.2d 417 [1948]. As to the authority of this court to apply equitable remedies in the enforcement of a final decree for alimony for the wife......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT