Stewart

Stewart v. Stewart

Good Law
1939 Cal. App. LEXIS 329·32 Cal. App. 2d 148·89 P.2d 404
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 13, 1939Civ. 11029California452 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nourse, J.

Plaintiff sued for divorce in the Superior Court in Alameda County. The defendant demurred and answered, setting up the special defense that he had previously instituted proceedings for divorce in the civil court of Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico, and that such proceedings were then pending. The plaintiff procured an order to show cause why defendant should not be required to pay alimony pendente lite, counsel fees, and costs. The defendant replied by affidavit, and a hearing was had. The notice of motion initiating the proceedings to show cause is not in the record, but the order making the award indicated that the hearing was had upon all the papers on file. From this order commanding the defendant to make payments for these purposes, he prosecutes this appeal. The single question presented is whether the pendency of the proceedings in Mexico ousts the California court of jurisdiction to make this order.

The answer admits this allegation of the complaint: “That said defendant was not at any time and is not now a resident of said Juarez, Mexico, and said' action was filed by said defendant against plaintiff solely for the purpose of harassing . . . plaintiff.”

The record discloses…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.