King v. Miller

• Decision Date: 05 December 1894
• Parties: KING v. MILLER ET AL.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

38 P. 1020

10 Wash. 274

KING v. MILLER ET AL.

Supreme Court of Washington

December 5, 1894

Appeal from superior court, Pierce county; Emmett N. Parker, Judge.

Action by Hannah A. King against Lachlan M. Miller and others. From a judgment for defendant Miller and plaintiff, defendants James B. King and another appeal. Affirmed.

Winsor Bush & Morris, for appellants.

A. R Titlow, for respondent King.

James H. Parker, for respondent Miller.

SCOTT J.

This was an action brought by Hannah A. King, the divorced wife of James B. King, to obtain certain relief with reference to alimony allowed her by the decree of divorce obtained by her May 15, 1890. In granting said decree of divorce the court awarded the custody of the two minor children to the plaintiff, and provided the defendant should pay to her the sum of $50 per month for the support and maintenance of herself and the children until they arrived at the age of 21 years, or so long as they were supported and cared for by plaintiff, and so long as plaintiff remained unmarried after the children attained their majority; and the decree further provided that the payment of such sums should be secured by a lien upon certain real estate situated in the city of Tacoma. No appeal was prosecuted from said decree and the defendant James B. King paid said alimony up to December 1, 1893, although the plaintiff had been compelled to resort to proceedings in court to enforce payment at certain times previously. In granting the decree of divorce certain other property of said parties was divided between them. After a default of two months in making said payments the plaintiff instituted this action, alleging failure and refusal to pay, and that the defendant James B. King had threatened to allow the land securing said sums to be sold for taxes, to destroy the lien thereon; and she asked to have said allowance consolidated into a gross sum at its present value, and to have the lien therefor upon the real estate foreclosed. The defendants Lachlan M. Miller and Lawrence W King were joined as parties who were alleged to have some interest in the premises. The defendants James B. King and Lawrence W. King appeared, and objected to the jurisdiction of the court in the premises. Defendant Miller appeared, and set up a mortgage executed to him upon certain of the property. Upon the trial the court rendered a decree establishing the mortgage claim as a prior lien upon a portion of the property, and decreed that the alimony previously allowed should be modified, and reduced to a gross sum of $2,500, and that the property upon which the lien had been created should be sold to satisfy the same; and also awarded execution...