McCormick v. McCormick

Citations

• 82 Kan. 31
• 107 P. 546
• 1910 Kan. LEXIS 191

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>Divorce — Foreign Judgment — Publication Service — Collateral A ttack- — Fraud—A limony —Res Judicata — Residence—Jurisdiction. In December, 1907, the defendant obtained a divorce from his wife, the plaintiff, in the circuit court of Jackson county, Missouri, according to the laws of that state. The wife was residing at the time in Shawnee county, Kansas, and was served by publication only. She knew of the pendency of the action, but made no appearance. The decree made no reference to alimony or property rights. In July, 1908, the plaintiff brought an action for alimony in Riley county, Kansas, where the defendant had real estate which was sequestered to pay the judgment sought. The defendant pleaded the Missouri decree and offered it in evidence at the trial. Held: (1) The present action was properly instituted in Riley county. (2) The Missouri court had jurisdiction to hear the cause before it even if the allegations of the petition were false, and to render the decree even if moved to do so by false testimony. (3) The Missouri decree was not open to collateral impeachment on the ground of fraud. (4) By chapter 184 of the Laws of 1907, which took effect on March 21, 1907, the legislature made the recognition- and enforcement of foreign divorce decrees based on publication service obligatory in this state, and placed such decrees on the same basis as judgments of the courts of this state with respect to all persons, and the status of all persons, affected. (5) Giving the decree of the Missouri court the force it would have if rendered by a court of this state, it was as effectual as if it had been founded on personal service. It dissolved the marriage, and the plaintiff was no longer the defendant’s wife. The cause was open for the consideration of the subject of alimony. No application for alimony having been presented and no award having been made, the judgment is a bar to the recovery of alimony now, although the matter was not s