Shattuck v. Shattuck
| Decision Date | 06 January 1927 |
| Docket Number | 20149. |
| Citation | 141 Wash. 600,251 P. 851 |
| Parties | SHATTUCK v. SHATTUCK. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 2. Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Frater, Judge.
Petition for modification of alimony by W. H. Shattuck against Josephine Shattuck. Judgment modifying alimony, and latter appeals. Affirmed.
James R. Chambers, of Seattle, for appellant.
Palmer Askren & Brethorst, of Seattle, for respondent.
In August, 1918, the respondent and the appellant were divorced. The latter was given the care and custody of the only children, two boys, we were then, respectively, 7 and 8 years of age. The decree required the respondent to pay alimony to the appellant for the care and custody of the children and for her own use, in the sum of $50 a month. The respondent has paid this alimony monthly until, in April 1926, he petitioned the court to be relieved of paying it. Prior to the present petition, and during the year 1924, he had made a like petition to the court, which, after a hearing, was denied. In September, 1919, the respondent was remarried, and now has four children by the second marriage. At the time of the hearing which we are reviewing, the respondent was about 44 years of age, and the appellant somewhat younger. At that time the two boys, who were the issue of the marriage between the parties to this proceeding, were 16 and 17 years of age, respectively, and the four children by the second marriage were aged, respectively, 6 years, 4 years, 2 years, and 6 months. The court granted the respondent's petition for a modification of the amount of alimony to the extent of reducing it from $50 to $20 per month. The former wife, being dissatisfied, has appealed.
During recent years the appellant and her two boys have been living in Seattle, and the respondent and his present family have been living on a farm near the town of Shine, in this state. When the original divorce was obtained, and when the hearing for a modification of the alimony was heard in 1924, the respondent was earning a salary on the farm which he was running of $125 a month. During the year preceding the last hearing his income had become less. Instead of receiving a salary, he was given the use of a 200-acre farm, of which there were some 20 or 30 acres of tillable land, in consideration of looking after and caring for some live stock on the farm belonging to the Puget Mill Company, the owner of the farm. The trial court found that during the year immediately preceding the hearing the respondent had made $1,007 net. We have read all the testimony, although it is not greatly in dispute. It is quite plain to us that, at least...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Feek v. Feek, 26218.
... ... Brown v. Brown, 31 Wash. 397, 72 P ... 86, 62 L.R.A. 974; Herrett v. Herrett, 80 Wash. 474, ... 141 P. 1158; Shattuck v. Shattuck, 141 Wash. 600, ... 251 P. 851; Cook v. Cook, 168 Wash. 649, 13 P.2d 38 ... Appellant is receiving from his business $200, ... ...
-
Mark v. Mark
...See, Toncray v. Toncray, 123 Tenn. 476, 496, 131 S.W. 977, 982, 34 L.R.A., N.S., 1106, 1114, Ann.Cas.1912C, 284, 289; Shattuck v. Shattuck, 141 Wash. 600, 251 P. 851.7 See, Morrison v. Morrison, 208 Iowa 1384, 227 N.W. 330.8 See, Morrison v. Morrison, 208 Iowa 1384, 227 N.W. 330; Aldrich v.......
-
Scudder v. Scudder
...had the right to apply to the court for a reduction of the support payments on the basis of a change in circumstance. Shattuck v. Shattuck, 1927, 141 Wash. 600, 251 P. 851. Here, his earning power has not merely been impaired, but, by virtue of his death, it had absolutely ceased to exist. ......
-
Hanson v. Hanson, 33204
...his children of a former marriage, as well as a responsibility to the second wife and the children of such marriage. In Shattuck v. Shattuck, 141 Wash. 600, 251 P. 851, this court indicated that the problem is one of the needs of all of the children of the husband, and that his income shoul......