State ex rel. Grover v. Grover

Decision Date22 March 1938
Citation77 P.2d 430,158 Or. 635
PartiesSTATE EX REL. GROVER <I>v.</I> GROVER
CourtOregon Supreme Court
                  Inability to comply with judgment or order as defense to charge
                of contempt, note, 76 A.L.R. 392. See, also, 1 R.C.L. 962 (1
                Perm. Supp., 246)
                  19 C.J. Divorce, § 702
                

Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County.

DONALD E. LONG, Judge.

Contempt proceeding by the State of Oregon, on the relation of Margaret Grover, against Charles Garfield Grover, to punish defendant for failure to pay alimony. From a judgment imposing sentence, defendant appeals.

AFFIRMED.

John A. Jeffrey and Joseph E. Harvey, both of Portland, for appellant.

Zanley F. Galton, of Portland (Mark A. Paulson and Goldstein & Galton, all of Portland, on the brief), for respondent.

BELT, J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment imposing upon him a sentence of six months in the county jail for wilful failure to obey a decree to pay alimony for support of plaintiff and her minor son.

On June 4, 1937, the court, upon motion of plaintiff, cited defendant to appear on June 9, 1937, and show cause why he should not be adjudged in contempt. Although such order, together with affidavit charging contempt, was served in person on defendant, he failed to make any appearance. On June 10, 1937, the court directed that a warrant be issued for the arrest of defendant on the charge of contempt. On June 12, 1937, defendant appeared in person and the court, after hearing, adjudged that defendant was guilty of contempt as charged.

On this appeal there is no transcript of the evidence. The sole question for consideration is whether sufficient facts are averred in the affidavit to show that defendant is guilty of wilful disobedience of the order and decree requiring him to pay alimony. The affidavit is as follows:

"State of Oregon, ex rel Mary Grover, Plaintiff, vs. Charles Garfield Grover, Defendant.

State of Oregon | >ss. County of Multnomah |

"I, Morris A. Goldstein, being first duly sworn, depose and say:

"That I am one of the attorneys for plaintiff in the above entitled suit;

"That a decree of Divorce has heretofore been entered in the above entitled Court and suit, which among other things provided that the plaintiff therein was awarded the sum of Twenty Five ($25.00) Dollars per month as permanent alimony for the support of plaintiff and her minor son, Robert W. Grover, beginning with the 15th day of November, 1933, and that there is now due your plaintiff $1062.50 with interest thereon at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the 15th day of November, 1933; the further sum of $75.00 as attorney's fees and suit money; the further sum of $33.75 for the costs and disbursements of this suit;

"That by virtue of the non-payment of the above sums, the defendant has not complied with the Order of Court, and the defendant has wilfully disobeyed the said Order of said Court "That I verily believe that the defendant has deliberately disobeyed the Order of Court, and I therefore ask that the defendant be immediately brought before the Court, and show cause, if any there be, why defendant should not be adjudged in contempt of Court. (Italics ours.)

                        MORRIS A. GOLDSTEIN         
                

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 4th day of June, 1937...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • State v. Nicholson
    • United States
    • Oregon Court of Appeals
    • November 2, 2016
    ...statement that contempt “is the wilful disregard of the authority of a court of justice.” The next year, in State ex rel. Grover v. Grover , 158 Or. 635, 639, 77 P.2d 430 (1938), the court quoted, with apparent approval, the United States Supreme Court's statement in Felton v. United States......
  • Steeves v. Second Judicial District Court in and for Washoe County
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court
    • October 24, 1939
    ... ... 628, 11 S.W. 669, 11 ... Am.St.Rep. 207; State ex rel. Olson v. Allen, 14 ... Wash. 684, 45 P. 644; Phillips v. Welch, ... Ohio St. 566, 64 N.E. 567, 58 L.R.A. 625; State ex rel ... Grover v. Grover, 158 Or. 635, 77 P.2d 430; State ex ... rel. Murphy v. Second ... ...
  • State v. Yates
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • October 24, 1956
    ...'bad intent'. State ex rel. Sondheim v. McClain, 136 Or. 60, 298 P. 213; Rust v. Pratt, 157 Or. 505, 72 P.2d 533; State ex rel. Grover v. Grover, 158 Or. 635, 77 P.2d 430. If a defendant in good faith reasonably believes it to be his duty to his client to object to apparent hostile manifest......
  • State v. O'Malley
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • December 29, 1967
    ...that 'he willfully failed to appear.' In a contempt proceeding, willfully means 'with a bad intent.' state ex rel. grover v. grover, 158 or. 635, 639, 77 P.2d 430 (1938). Contemnor next contends that the proof is insufficient to sustain a finding of willfullness in failing to appear. He arg......
  • 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