Whitten v. Durkee
| Decision Date | 29 June 1951 |
| Citation | 99 N.E.2d 748,327 Mass. 562 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
| Parties | WHITTEN v. DURKEE. |
F. A. Cashman, Lynn, for petitioner.
R. W. Reardon, Salem, for respondent.
Before QUA, C. J., and WILKINS, SPALDING, WILLIAMS and COUNIHAN, JJ.
This is an appeal from a decree of the Probate Court dismissing a petition filed by Audrey H. Whitten, hereinafter called the petitioner, against her former husband Wendell E. Durkee, hereinafter called the respondent, for contempt because of his failure to obey a decree of the court entered in divorce proceedings between the petitioner and the respondent. In the decree appealed from the judge found that the respondent owed the petitioner the sum of $1,590 as of September 26, 1950, the date of the contempt petition, but that the nonpayment thereof was not contemptuous disregard of the original decree of the court, and he dismissed this petition. We assume without deciding that the respondent is an aggrieved party. The evidence is reported and the judge at the request of the respondent made findings of material facts.
In these circumstances it is our duty to examine the evidence and decide the case according to our own judgment. Findings made by the judge, however, are not to be reversed unless plainly wrong. Whitney v. Whitney, 325 Mass. 28, 29, 88 N.E.2d 647.
The findings of the judge and the evidence disclose the following: By a decree of the Probate Court dated May 17, 1944, the petitioner was granted a divorce nisi from the respondent which later became absolute. In this decree the petitioner was given the custody of their two minor children and the respondent was ordered to pay $65 each week for the support of the petitioner and the children. The respondent paid this order until September, 1948, when, without modification by the court, he reduced the payments to $50 each week. He discontinued the payments entirely in July, 1950, when the petitioner remarried. During the period from the entry of the divorce decree to the date of this petition for contempt the respondent expended for the education of the children in private schools and summer camps as well as for substantially all of their board, clothes and incidental expenses, moneys greatly in excess of the order of the court. At all times he was of sufficient means to pay the order. Prior to her remarriage the petitioner earned income which at one time amounted to $120 a month.
The respondent asserted that the original ordered for $65 weekly was reduced by an agreement with the petitioner in September, 1948...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rosen v. Rosen
...and related expenses of the children." Whelan v. Frisbee, 29 Mass.App.Ct. 76, 82, 557 N.E.2d 55 (1990), citing Whitten v. Durkee, 327 Mass. 562, 562–564, 99 N.E.2d 748 (1951). Although our decision in Whelan could arguably be viewed as implicitly supporting the "equitable credit" concept, w......
-
Whelan v. Frisbee
...of the children. There was no error in the entry of judgment for Lawrence on Susan's complaint for contempt. See Whitten v. Durkee, 327 Mass. 562, 562-564, 99 N.E.2d 748 (1951). Judgments 1 Susan Frisbee vs. Lawrence T. Whelan.2 The parties had joint legal custody, with Susan having physica......
-
Cohen v. Murphy
...only as to the future, but also as to arrears.' Watts v. Watts, 314 Mass. 129, 133, 49 N.E.2d 609, 612 (1943). Whitten v. Durkee, 327 Mass. 562, 564, 99 N.E.2d 748 (1951). He did not purport to modify the arrearages, however. Instead, he ruled as matter of law that in the absence of agreeme......
-
Schlichte v. Schlichte
...had refused to comply with the 1972 decree. See Whitney v. Whitney, 325 Mass. 28, 28--29, 88 N.E.2d 647 (1949); Whitten v. Durkee, 327 Mass. 562, 563, 99 N.E.2d 748 (1951). The respondent has also appealed from an order requiring him to pay the petitioner $100 as an allowance for costs incu......