Kipping v. Kipping
| Decision Date | 28 February 1948 |
| Citation | 209 S.W.2d 27,186 Tenn. 247 |
| Parties | KIPPING v. KIPPING. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Appeal from Chancery Court, Rutherford County; R. E. Lee Chancellor.
Divorce action by Mrs. Ruth Reagor Kipping against Paul Kipping, Sr. Complainant was granted a divorce and custody of parties' minor son was awarded to her. On complainant's motion for a declaration of the proper credit and application of amount which had been paid to her as trustee of her minor son by the United States government for the support and education of her minor son. From an adverse decree, defendant appeals.
Decree modified and cause remanded for entry of a decree in accordance with the opinion.
E. M. Yerger, of Clarksdale, Miss., for appellant.
George S. Buckner, of Murfreesboro, for appellee.
The petition which presents the question to be determined on this appeal was filed by Mrs. Ruth Reagor Kipping as Trustee for her minor son, against her former husband, Paul Kipping, to secure a declaration from the Chancellor (Code sec. 8835 et seq.) of the proper credit and application of the sum of $1761.57, which had been paid to her as trustee, by the United States Government for the support and education of her said minor son. The petition was filed as a supplement to the divorce proceeding which had been retained in Court 'for such further orders and decrees as may be deemed necessary by the Court.'
In the cause, on September 5, 1942, Mrs. Kipping had obtained a divorce from her husband, Paul Kipping, and in the divorce decree she secured the custody of her minor child, Paul Kipping, Jr., and in that decree it was further provided by consent of parties, that Paul Kipping, Sr. should pay to Mrs. Kipping the sum of $5,000 in installments and for purposes as follows:
'He will also pay to complainant, Mrs. Kipping, Trustee, without bond, the sum of $1250, annually, for four years, for the support of their minor child, Paul Kipping, Jr., these payments to be made annually, beginning on October 15, 1943, and thereafter on said date, until the said sum of $5000.00 shall be paid complainant, Trustee, for the support of said child.'
On the 2nd day of November, 1942, Paul Kipping, Sr., volunteered in the United States Army, and remained in military service until the 26th day of May, 1945. During his months of military service under the 'Servicemen's Dependents Allowance Act of 1942,' 37 U.S.C.A. §§ 201 though 221, the United States Government paid to the former wife the sum of $1761.57, of which $384.30 was deducted from the soldier's pay, and $1377.27 contributed by the Government. The question presented by the appeal is what part, if any, of this $1761.57 shall be credited on the $5000 judgment against Paul Kipping, Sr.
The Chancellor held that the sum of $384.30 deducted from the soldier's pay should be so credited, but he held further that the sum of $1377.27 should not. From this decree Defendant has perfected the appeal and insists simply that he was entitled to credit for the full amount of $1761.57 on the judgment for $5000.
The question presented is apparently a new one. Counsel has not found, nor have we, by independent investigation, any reported case which is in point. The Chancellor wrote no opinion to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clark v. Clark
...[544-45, ]538 P.2d 649, 654 (Kan.1975); Palow v. Kitchin, 149 Me. 113, [118, ]99 A.2d 305, 308 (Me.1953); Kipping v. Kipping, 186 Tenn. 247, [250-51, ]209 S.W.2d 27, 29 (Tenn.1948). Similarly, other courts have held a parent is entitled to a credit for social security death benefits. See, e......
-
In re Marriage of Belger
...Andler, 217 Kan. 538, 538 P.2d 649, 654 (Kan.1975); Palow v. Kitchin, 149 Me. 113, 99 A.2d 305, 308 (Me.1953); Kipping v. Kipping, 186 Tenn. 247, 209 S.W.2d 27, 29 (Tenn. 1948). Similarly, other courts have held a parent is entitled to a credit for social security death benefits. See, e.g.,......
-
Mooneyham v. Mooneyham
...should not be credited." Other cases reaching the same conclusion are Cash v. Cash, 234 Ark. 603, 353 S.W.2d 348; Kipping v. Kipping, 186 Tenn. 247, 209 S.W.2d 27; Hopwood v. Hopwood, 169 Neb. 760, 100 N.W.2d 833; Cohen v. Murphy, 368 Mass. 144, 330 N.E.2d 473; Andler v. Andler, 217 Kan. 53......
-
Sterrett v. Sterrett
...to a serviceman's dependent under Class A. However, we note the case of Kipping v. Kipping, by the Supreme Court of Tennessee, 186 Tenn. 247, 209 S.W.2d 27, 28, wherein Mrs. Kipping obtained a divorce against her husband, Paul Kipping, on September 5, 1942; he was ordered to pay the sum of ......