Keener v. Keener

Decision Date01 December 1942
PartiesKEENER v. KEENER.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pinellas County; T. Frank Hobson, judge.

Joe S Clark and L. D. Martin, both of St. Petersburg, for plaintiff.

B. M Skelton, of St. Petersburg, for defendant.

TERRELL, Justice.

Horace H. Keener and Nancy Tindell Keener were married in Kentucky in 1923. They were divorced in North Carolina in 1936 at the instance of Horace H. Keener.

Both subsequently moved to Florida and in May, 1941, Nancy Tindell Keener filed her bill of complaint praying that she be divorced from Horace H. Keener, that suitable alimony be awarded her over and above that awarded for support of the two children that were the product of their union. Answer was duly filed and the issues in the cause have been made up.

The prayer for divorce was predicated on the ground recited in paragraph eight, Section 65.04, Florida Statutes 1941, as follows 'that the defendant has obtained a divorce from the complainant in any other state or country'.

Under Rule 38 of the Rules of this Court, the Chancellor has certified four questions for our consideration. In Schwob Co. of Florida v. Florida Industrial Commission, 11 So.2d 782, this Court defined the scope of Rule 38 and by the test there prescribed, only one of the questions certified is within the contemplation of the rule, viz.: May the plaintiff in this case be granted a divorce from the defendant on the ground that he (defendant) had secured a divorce from the complainant in another state?

We have not before been called on to define the scope of the statute brought in question though it was before us in Givens v Givens, 121 Fla. 270, 163 So. 574; McGowin v. McGowin, 131 Fla. 247, 173 So. 927; and Maclay v. Maclay, 147 Fla. 77, 2 So.2d 361. A literal interpretation might require a pronouncement to the effect that when an absolute divorce is granted to a complainant in another state and the defendant in that case becomes the complainant in a divorce suit brought in this state against the complainant in the former suit, the complainant here would be entitled to prevail.

We do not think such an interpretation comports with reason and justice. It would sanction the relitigation of divorce proceedings long settled by final decrees of courts of competent jurisdiction; it would permit one to be harassed for suit money in more than one state; there would be no end to divorce litigation; and the full faith and credit clause of the Federal Constitution, Section One, Article Four, Constitution of the United States, would for that case be set at naught.

If the foreign divorce is valid in the state where secured, it will be recognized under the full...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Rediker v. Rediker
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • August 18, 1950
    ...contends that an existing valid marriage is a condition precedent to the entry of a divorce decree under Florida law, Keener v. Keener, 152 Fla. 13, 11 So.2d 180, and that the entry of the decree imports a finding that defendant and Bessie were lawfully married at the time of its entry, fiv......
  • Albaugh v. Albaugh
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • January 5, 1948
    ...the jurisdiction of the Missouri court shall be relitigated in the courts of Michigan. The supreme court of Florida in Keener v. Keener, 152 Fla. 13, 11 So.2d 180, 181, had before it a question analagous to the issue here. The pertinent provision of the Florida statute, Florida Statutes 194......
  • Mirras v. Mirras, 7444
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 27, 1967
    ...the full faith and credit clause forbids relitigation by the Florida courts of a decree of divorce by a sister state (See Keener v. Keener, 152 Fla. 13, 11 So.2d 180), the foreign decree is entitled only to the finality to which it is entitled in the state where rendered. (People of State o......
  • Furman v. Furman, 60-281
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 18, 1961
    ...decree was entered, this Court opines that it would be governed by the answer of the Supreme Court of Florida in the case of Keener vs. Keener , 11 So.2d 180, wherein that Court "If on the other hand jurisdiction of the defendant (Plaintiff here) was not acquired or the divorce is not effec......
  • 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