Wimpee v. Wimpee
| Decision Date | 07 January 1994 |
| Citation | 641 So.2d 287 |
| Parties | Benjamin Mark WIMPEE v. Sammy Dean WIMPEE. AV92000701. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Roy O. McCord of McCord & Martin, Gadsden, for appellant.
Rodney L. Ward, Gadsden, for appellee.
L. CHARLES WRIGHT, Retired Appellate Judge.
The parties were divorced in April 1991. The judgment of divorce, ratifying an agreement of the parties, contained the following pertinent provision:
In July 1991 the mother filed a petition to have the father held in contempt of court for failing to pay the son's college expenses. The mother amended her petition in September 1991 and requested that the trial court clarify the provision in the judgment relating to the son's college expenses. Based on the pleadings and a brief submitted by the mother, the court interpreted the provision to mean that the father was responsible for all of the son's college expenses until the mother obtained full-time employment. Once the mother became fully employed, the parties would equally divide the expenses. The father filed post-judgment motions, which were denied. He appeals.
The father asserts that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the mother's petition because there was no ambiguity in the final judgment.
When a trial court adopts a separation agreement, it is merged into the final judgment of divorce. Dees v. Dees, 581 So.2d 1103 (Ala.Civ.App.1990). A judgment of divorce is to be interpreted or construed like other written instruments. Dees. Whether an agreement is ambiguous is a question of law to be determined by the trial court. Dees. If the agreement is susceptible to more than one meaning, then an ambiguity exists. If only one reasonable meaning clearly emerges, then the agreement is unambiguous. Vainrib v. Downey, 565 So.2d 647 (Ala.Civ.App.1990). If a provision of an agreement is certain and clear, it is the duty of the trial court to determine its meaning. Vainrib. The words of the agreement are to be given their ordinary meaning, and the intentions of the parties are to be derived from them. Vainrib. The interpretation made by the trial court is accorded a heavy...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jardine v. Jardine
...a settlement agreement or a resulting divorce judgment is ambiguous is a question of law for the trial court. Wimpee v. Wimpee, 641 So.2d 287, 288 (Ala.Civ.App.1994) (explaining also that "[w]hen a trial court adopts a separation agreement, it is merged into the final judgment of In Mayhan ......
-
Graham v. Graham
...their ordinary meaning ...." Id. at 1183. Whether [a judgment] is ambiguous is a question of law for the trial court. Wimpee v. Wimpee, 641 So. 2d 287 (Ala. Civ. App. 1994). [A judgment] that by its terms is plain and free from ambiguity must be enforced as written. Jones v. Jones, 722 So. ......
-
Ex parte Peake
...of correctness and will not be disturbed unless it is palpably erroneous. Grizzell v. Grizzell, 583 So.2d 1349 (Ala. Civ. App. 1991)." 641 So.2d at 288. The Wimpee court's reliance Grizzell v. Grizzell, 583 So.2d 1349, 1350-51 (Ala. Civ. App. 1991), as to a presumption of correctness was mi......
-
Reeves v. Reeves
...nature."' "). "When a trial court adopts a [settlement] agreement, it is merged into the final judgment of divorce." Wimpee v. Wimpee, 641 So.2d 287, 288 (Ala. Civ. App. 1994). " '" '[A] settlement agreement which incorporated into a divorce decree is in the nature of a contract.' Smith v. ......