Reiling v. Reiling

Decision Date14 April 1970
PartiesM. Lela REILING, Respondent, v. Edward A. REILING, Appellant.
CourtOregon Court of Appeals

John L. Schwabe and Ridgway K. Foley, Jr., Portland, argued the cause for appellant. With them on the briefs were Mautz, Souther, Spaulding, Kinsey & Williamson, Portland.

John A. Bryan, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were DeArmond, Sherman & Barber, Salem.

FOLEY, Judge.

The question raised by this appeal is whether a provision of a purported antenuptial agreement in which the wife waives the right to alimony and support is enforceable where the marriage is terminated by the wife obtaining a divorce from the husband.

Plaintiff-wife and defendant-husband, Oregon residents, were married on November 18, 1960, at Reno, Nevada. Plaintiff was 45 years of age and defendant was 47. This was the second marriage for each. Plaintiff had two adult children by her former marriage and defendant had none. No children were born to this union. Each of the parties had accumulated separate property. The plaintiff's separate property consisted principally of a house and lot in Salem. In addition, she had been receiving a Veterans Administration widow's pension of $50.40 per month, and was also entitled to a real property tax exemption estimated at $15.41 per month, both of which were terminated upon her marriage to the defendant. The defendant owned a 53-acre farm and some personal property. The values of the respective properties are not clearly reflected in the record but complete disclosure was made by each of the parties as to his separate property at the time of the agreement hereinafter mentioned. Plaintiff was granted a divorce in 1968 after about eight years of marriage and defendant was required by the decree to pay $100 per month for her support and $650 attorney fees. Defendant appeals from that portion of the decree which ordered him to pay the monthly support and attorney fees.

Near the time of the marriage the parties entered into what was labeled and treated by them as an antenuptial agreement. The agreement was dated November 17, 1960, but was actually executed two or three months after the marriage and was based upon the oral agreement of the parties made prior to the marriage. Since the parties have considered it an antenuptial agreement and have not questioned its validity by reason of the time of execution, we treat it as an antenuptial agreement for the purposes of this appeal. Each released all rights he might otherwise obtain in the property of the other by virtue of the impending marriage. Both parties agreed that each should maintain complete control of his separate estate and at the request of the other each agreed to execute any document necessary to facilitate the agreement.

That part of the agreement giving rise to the principal question raised in this appeal is paragraph 4, which reads as follows:

'McAllister (plaintiff) hereby releases and waives any and all rights she might now have or in the future acquire to alimony or other form of support allowance payable by Reiling (defendant) before, upon or after divorce of the parties, whether authorized by statute, any court or otherwise.'

By statute in Oregon the court, in c...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Marriage of Higgason, In re
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • December 5, 1973
    ...364, 368; Graham v. Graham (D.C.E.D.Mich.N.D.1940) 33 F.Supp. 936, 938--939; Belcher v. Belcher (Fla.) 271 So.2d 7, 9; Reiling v. Reiling, 1 Or.App. 571, 463 P.2d 591, 592; Volid v. Volid, 6 Ill.App.3d 386, 286 N.E.2d 42, 47; Norris v. Norris (Iowa) 174 N.W.2d 368, 370(4); Garlock v. Garloc......
  • Unander v. Unander
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • February 23, 1973
    ...necessary for the support of the wife; if it had been the court indicated the contract 'would have to give way to that extent.' 1 Or.App. 571, 463 P.2d 591, 592. ...
  • Reiling v. Reiling
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • September 11, 1970
    ...upon divorce. Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals set aside the allowance of alimony and held the agreement valid. Or.App., 90 Adv.Sh. 51, 463 P.2d 591 (1970). This court granted a writ of The sole issue is whether that part of an antenuptial agreement is invalid, because of public policy, wh......
  • Unander v. Unander
    • United States
    • Oregon Court of Appeals
    • October 5, 1972
    ...with the terms of the agreement set forth above. The precise point is a matter of first impression in Oregon. In Reiling v. Reiling, 1 Or.App. 571, 463 P.2d 591 (1970), we were dealing with an antenuptial agreement which provided that in the event of divorce, alimony was to be waived. Despi......

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