Dailey v. Dailey

• Decision Date: 08 June 1931
• Docket Number: 22923.
• Citation: 163 Wash. 104,299 P. 988
• Parties: DAILEY v. DAILEY.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

299 P. 988

163 Wash. 104

DAILEY v. DAILEY.

No. 22923.

Supreme Court of Washington

June 8, 1931

Department 2.

Appeal from Superior Court, Snohomish County; Edwin Gruber, Judge.

Divorce action by A. E. Dailey against F. O. Dailey. From part of an order which, among other things, stayed all proceedings until plaintiff should pay certain sums accruing under orders and judgments in a previous action between the same parties plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

John B Fogarty, of Everett, for appellant.

Lewis &amp Black, of Seattle, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant brought this action for a divorce on two grounds. He had previously brought an action for the same relief upon other grounds. In that action a divorce was denied on December 4, 1926, but the wife, upon her cross-complaint, was allowed separate maintenance in money to be paid periodically. Twice after the entry of that decree the appellant sought to have it vacated, but without success. Some history of the litigation between these parties may be found in the following cases in this court: Dailey v Dailey, 148 Wash. 668, 269 P. 1118; State ex rel. Dailey v. Superior Court, 150 Wash. 299, 272 P. 733; Dailey v. Dailey, 154 Wash. 499, 282 P. 830.

In the present action the respondent moved against the complaint and also for an allowance for attorney's fees and suit money, and asked that the appellant be required to pay to her certain costs and attorney's fees in the previous litigation and that all proceedings in this cause be stayed until the appellant should pay to her all sums accrued and to accrue due her under the separate maintenance decree.

This motion was heard by the superior court upon the affidavit supporting it and upon oral and written evidence taken at the hearing. As a result of the hearing the court entered an order directing the appellant to pay certain sums as attorney's fees and suit money and staying all proceedings until the appellant should pay all costs and attorney's fees owed the respondent under judgments and orders in the earlier case and all unpaid sums accrued and to accrue under the separate maintenance decree. The appeal is from all of the order, except the part allowing specific sums for attorney's fees and suit money.

The part of the order appealed from reads as follows: 'And it is further ordered that all further proceedings in this action be, and the same hereby are, stated until the plaintiff shall have paid to the defendant or to her attorneys, or into the registry of this court for the defendant, all unpaid costs, attorneys' fees and alimony, including such alimony as may hereafter accrue prior to the full payment thereof by the plaintiff, due from the plaintiff to the defendant under and by...