Crimm v. Crimm
Decision Date | 07 February 1924 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 924. |
Citation | 99 So. 301,211 Ala. 13 |
Parties | CRIMM v. CRIMM. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Pickens County; R.I. Jones, Judge.
Bill in equity by Hommie A. P. Crimm against John T. Crimm for divorce. From a decree for complainant, respondent appeals. Reversed and remanded.
F. F Windham, of Tuscaloosa, and P. B. Traweek, of Elba, for appellant.
H. A. & D. K. Jones, of Tuscaloosa, for appellee.
Appellant's chief contentions are (1) that the amendment to the bill was without notice to respondent, and as to it there was neither answer nor decree pro confesso, wherefore the submission for final decree was premature and erroneous and (2) that the decree granting a divorce to complainant was erroneous, because it appeared that a valid divorce a vinculo matrimonii was granted to him against complainant by the superior court of Fulton county, Ga., on November 29, 1920.
Under the Act of September 22, 1915 (Gen. Acts 1915, p. 705), a copy of the amendment to the bill of complaint should have been served on the respondent, or his solicitor of record and the respondent should have been required to answer within 20 days thereafter. It does not appear that any notice of this amendment was given as required by law, and very clearly the cause was not ready for submission at the time it was submitted by the complainant-6 days after the filing of the amendment. Respondent was not present and did not join in the submission of the cause, and hence did not waive his right to have notice, and to make further answer and proof.
We deem it advisable, however, to state the principles of law which are applicable to the decree of divorce by the Georgia court, exhibited by respondent as a bar to the relief sought by the bill of complaint.
But, on principles of comity, such decrees are generally recognized as valid and binding in other states, when they do not contravene good morals or public policy. 19 Corp. Jur. 374 (§ 841); 9 R. C. L. 516, § 337. An excellent discussion of the rationale and practice of this comity will be found in Joyner v. Joyner, 131 Ga. 217, 62 S.E. 182, 18 L. R. A. (N. S.) 647, 127 Am. St. Rep. 220. In Alabama this rule of comity undoubtedly prevails, but it does not require the courts of this state to recognize as valid a judgment of a sister state on a showing of jurisdiction which would not support a domestic judgment of the same character.
In Foster v. Glazener, 27 Ala. 391, this court considered the validity of a summary judgment rendered by the superior court of Forsyth county, Ga., the transcript of which did not show that court had obtained jurisdiction of either the person or property of Glazener. It was there said:
Applying the principle stated to the case in hand, the court further observed:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Vaughan v. Vaughan, 2 Div. 359
...cause were one within its original and general jurisdiction.' Johnson v. Johnson, 182 Ala. 376, 384, 62 So. 706, 709. See Crimm v. Crimm, 211 Ala. 13, 99 So. 301. There is no question in this case but that jurisdiction of the trial court was invoked by an appropriate complaint and the actio......
-
Phillips v. Ashworth
... ... 305, 68 So. 143); and that proper ... notice to defendant as shown by the record is jurisdictional ... in a court exercising limited powers (Crimm v ... Crimm, 211 Ala. 13, 99 So. 301; L. & N. R. Co. v ... Tally, 203 Ala. 370, 83 So. 114). The admission of ... counsel and absence from the ... ...
-
Merchants Nat. Bank of Mobile v. Morris
...appear on the record and be introduced in evidence as a support to the decree. Tillery v. Tillery, 217 Ala. 142, 115 So. 27; Crimm v. Crimm, 211 Ala. 13, 99 So. 301; v. Martin, 173 Ala. 106, 111, 55 So. 632; Harbin v. Harbin, 249 Ala. 616, 32 So.2d 537; 8 Alabama Digest, Divorce, k 57, Pock......
-
Prudential Insurance Company of America v. Lewis, Civ. A. No. 68-55.
...by a foreign jurisdiction on a showing of jurisdiction which would not support a domestic judgment of the same character. Crimm v. Crimm, 211 Ala. 13, 99 So. 301. Although involving residents of a sister state and an action for divorce in Alabama, the court in Jennings v. Jennings, 251 Ala.......