Sorrells v. Sorrells
| Decision Date | 07 October 1955 |
| Parties | Clara Susle SORRELLS, Appellant, v. Clarence Engene SORRELLS, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Coe & Coe, Pensacola, for appellant.
F. Churchill Mellen, Pensacola, for appellee.
Appellant, who was plaintiff below, appeals from a decree confirming an Alabama divorce decree in favor of the appellee and cancelling a prior decree of the lower Court which awarded to the appellant-plaintiff separate maintenance.
On July 31, 1951, pursuant to a decision of this Court, Sorrells v. Sorrells, Fla. 1951, 53 So.2d 645, the Judge of the Court of Record of Escambia County awarded to the appellant a weekly separate maintenance allowance to be paid by the appellee. On February 3, 1954, while the separate maintenance decree was still in effect, the appellee obtained a decree of divorce from the appellant in the State of Alabama. This decree was bottomed on constructive service and the appellant did not personally appear in the cause in the State of Alabama. The divorce decree merely dissolved and annulled the bonds of matrimony theretofore existing between the parties and in no way passed upon the pre-existing Florida separate maintenance decree or any property rights between the parties. On March 6, 1954, appellant filed in the Court of Record of Escambia County, Florida, a petition alleging delinquency in the payment of the separate maintenance allowance granted to her by the Florida decree. A rule nisi in contempt was issued against the appellee-husband and he was placed under a $1,000.00 ne exeat bond.
At the hearing on the rule nisi the husband resisted the petition on the sole ground that he had been granted a decree of divorce in the State of Alabama, that this decree was entitled to full faith and credit in Florida under the Constitution of the United States and that the bonds of matrimony having been dissolved, he was thereby released from any and every obligation, past and present, growing out of the marital relationship including the obligation established by the Florida separate maintenance decree.
The cause was heard by a Commissioner who ruled in favor of the appellee. The ruling of the Commissioner was confirmed and approved by the Judge of the Court of Record of Escambia County, Florida. The decree from which this appeal is taken extended to the Alabama divorce decree full faith and credit in Florida and further held that the effect of the Alabama decree was to cancel and annul the right of the appellant-wife to collect alimony or separate maintenance under the pre-existing decree of the Florida court. The writ of ne exeat was discharged and the bond was cancelled.
Appellant contends that the Alabama divorce decree was invalid for the alleged reason that the Alabama court lacked jurisdiction because the appellee here, who was the plaintiff in that proceeding, was not a bona fide resident of Alabama when he instituted the divorce proceeding in that state. It is further contended on behalf of the appellant that regardless of the validity of the Alabama decree, the rights of the appellant under the pre-existing Florida separate maintenance decree could not be adversely affected, on the theory that the Alabama decree was grounded on constructive service, that the Court did not obtain jurisdiction over the person and property rights of the present appellant and, therefore, could not and actually did not dispose...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Altman v. Altman
...295, 300-301 (1959) (Traynor, J.); Hopson v. Hopson, 95 U.S.App.D.C. 285, 221 F.2d 839, 847 (1955) (applying D.C. law); Sorrells v. Sorrells, 82 So.2d 684, 686 (Fla.1955); Pope v. Pope, 2 Ill.2d 152, 117 N.E.2d 65, 66 (1954); King v. King, 185 Kan. 742, 347 P.2d 381, 388 (1959); Taylor v. T......
-
Snider v. Snider
...v. Malcolm, 345 Mich. 720, 76 N.W.2d 831, 834 (1956); Hopson v. Hopson, 95 U.S.App.D.C. 285, 221 F.2d 839, 847 (1955); Sorrells v. Sorrells, 82 So.2d 684, 686 (Fla.1955); Armstrong v. Armstrong, 162 Ohio St. 406, 123 N.E.2d 267, 269 (1954), aff'd, 350 U.S. 568, 76 S.Ct. 629, 100 L.Ed. 705 (......
-
Orbe v. Orbe
...resolve all issues between the parties including property disputes and questions of support and equitable distribution. Sorrells v. Sorrells, 82 So.2d 684 (Fla.1995); Birnbaum v. Birnbaum, 615 So.2d 241 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Orlowitz v. Orlowitz, 208 So.2d 849 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 207......
-
Phelan v. Phelan
...going to a sister state and obtaining a foreign ex parte divorce. Hudson v. Hudson, 52 Cal.2d 735, 344 P.2d 295 (1959); Sorrells v. Sorrells, 82 So.2d 684 (Fla.1955); Pope v. Pope, 2 Ill.2d 152, 117 N.E.2d 65 (1954); Miller v. Miller, 200 Iowa 1193, 206 N.W. 262 (1925); Kram v. Kram, 52 N.J......