LEVINE., Levine v. Levine

• Decision Date: 08 February 1927
• Citation: 121 Or. 44,252 P. 972
• Parties: LEVINE v. LEVINE. [a1]
• Court: Oregon Supreme Court

252 P. 972

121 Or. 44

LEVINE v. LEVINE. ^[a1]

Supreme Court of Oregon

February 8, 1927

Department 2.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County; Robert G. Morrow Judge.

Action by Hildegarde Levine against David Levine. From an order sustaining a demurrer to plaintiff's complaint and a judgment entered thereon, plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

C. H. Greene, of Portland (Joseph, Haney &amp Littlefield and C. H. Greene, all of Portland, on the brief) for appellant.

L. E Schmitt, of Portland, for respondent.

RAND J.

On October 22, 1913, by a decree of the district court of the state of Minnesota for Hennepin county, plaintiff was granted an absolute divorce from her husband, the defendant herein and he was required to pay in future installments the sum of $25 per month for the care and maintenance of their minor child. Without having paid any of said installments, defendant removed from the state of Minnesota, and became a resident of this state. In 1918 plaintiff commenced an action in this state on said decree to recover a judgment for the amount of the then past-due and unpaid installments, and obtained a judgment for said amount. That judgment was reversed upon appeal ( Levine v. Levine, 95 Or. 94, 187 P. 609), where it was held that an action brought to recover judgment upon a decree rendered in a sister state which provides for the payment of future installments cannot be maintained in this state to recover "installments which have accrued after the date of the rendition of the decree until the Minnesota court which granted the original decree adjudicates the amount of the arrears and by such adjudication transforms the accrued installments into a fixed sum payable presently." In conformity to these directions, plaintiff later filed her petition in the Minnesota court praying for an adjudication of the amount of the installments then past due and unpaid, and, in pursuance thereof, on August 14, 1920, obtained an adjudication by that court that the sum of $1,891 was then due and unpaid to plaintiff under its former decree. After having obtained said adjudication of the amount of the installments which were then past due and unpaid, she commenced this action to recover that amount from the defendant, basing her right thereto upon said original decree and the supplemental decree or judgment entered in the Minnesota court. Defendant demurred to the complaint upon the ground that the Minnesota court had no jurisdiction to make an adjudication of the amount then past due and unpaid under its...