Robinson v. Schrade, 84-302

Decision Date02 April 1985
Docket NumberNo. 84-302,84-302
Citation697 P.2d 923,42 St.Rep. 401,215 Mont. 326
PartiesMarjorie L. ROBINSON, Anna M. Schrade and Marjorie L. Robinson on Behalf of Amy J. Schrade, a minor, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Richard L. SCHRADE, Defendant and Respondent.
CourtMontana Supreme Court

Sverdrup & Spencer, Scott B. Spencer, Libby, for plaintiffs and appellants.

L. Charles Evans, Libby, for defendant and respondent.

MORRISON, Justice.

This is an appeal from the judgment of District Court of the Nineteenth Judicial District in the County of Lincoln modifying a written contract by a subsequent oral agreement.

On June 9, 1983 Marjorie L. Robinson brought an action to enforce the terms of a written agreement entered into by Robinson and her divorced spouse, Richard L. Schrade on April 24, 1969. After a non-jury trial Judge Robert M. Holter entered a judgment in favor of Schrade holding that the written contract was modified by a subsequent oral agreement. Robinson appeals. We affirm.

The marriage of Robinson and Schrade was dissolved by decree on January 17, 1969. Robinson was granted custody of their two children and Schrade was ordered to pay $125 per child per month. There was no division of marital property. Robinson lived in the family house and made the monthly $130 mortgage payments.

On April 24, 1969 Robinson and Schrade signed an agreement prepared by Schrade's attorney wherein the parties agreed to attempt to sell their house for a minimum price of $20,000 with the net proceeds to be placed in a savings account for the college education of their children. The April agreement also provided that if Robinson vacated the house prior to its sale, Schrade's child support obligation would be reduced to $50 per child per month since Schrade would be responsible for the house payment. The parties intended to submit the April agreement for court approval. They did not. After investing $3,400 in improvements, the parties were unable to sell their house.

Robinson moved out of the family residence when she remarried on August 23, 1969. This occurred while Schrade was vacationing with their children. Upon returning home from their vacation, Schrade found Robinson preparing to remove furnishings and other items of personal property. Schrade protested Robinson's actions since no property settlement agreement had been negotiated between them. Robinson agreed to Schrade's proposed settlement by which he received the house in return for Robinson taking any furnishings she wished and receiving title to the family car. On August 28, 1969 Robinson signed a quitclaim deed to her interest in the house and Schrade transferred title to the car to Robinson. Robinson took the personal property she desired without interference by Schrade. On September 1, 1969 Robinson moved to Idaho where she has resided until the time of this action.

A petition for modification was prepared September, 1969 seeking only to modify the child support provisions of the Decree. The petition made no reference to the sale of the house or any educational fund. The petition was never signed by the parties or presented to the court.

After Robinson and the children moved to Idaho, Schrade continued his support obligations. His payments remained current. He paid medical, dental and optical bills. He contributed to his oldest daughter's tuition and expenses related to her cosmetology school.

Since her move to Idaho over thirteen years ago, Robinson never questioned Schrade with regard to the sale of the house or the establishment of a savings account for the higher education of their daughters. The oldest daughter testified that during her visits with her father at their family residence she never discussed his plans to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Young v. Flathead County
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • 13 June 1988
  • Hunter v. City of Bozeman, 84-381
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • 30 May 1985
    ...that the lease was in fact a public works contract. This is a substantial credible evidence question. Robinson v. Schrade (Mont.1985), 697 P.2d 923, 925, 42 St.Rep. 401, 403. We must view the evidence in a light most favorable to respondent, Mountain West Farm Bureau Mutual Ins. Co. v. Girt......
  • Vinion v. Wood Yard, Inc.
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • 19 May 1988
    ...Department of Revenue v. New Life Fellowship of Montana, Inc. (Mont.1985), 703 P.2d 860, 862, 42 St.Rep. 1129; Robinson v. Schrade (Mont.1985), 697 P.2d 923, 925, 42 St.Rep. 401. The filed complaint requested $20,000 for the diminution of value of the building. Vinion first stated at trial ......
  • Marry v. Missoula County Sheriff's Dept., 93-323
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • 28 December 1993
    ...evidence supports those findings. Emcasco Ins. Co. v. Waymire (1990), 242 Mont. 131, 135, 788 P.2d 1357, 1360; Robinson v. Schrade (1985), 215 Mont. 326, 328, 697 P.2d 923, 925. However, when, as here, a district court amends a finding of fact to support a conclusion of law, we will review ......
  • 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