Claggett v. Claggett

Oregon Supreme Court

Claggett v. Claggett

238 P. 1119, 236 P. 482, 115 Or. 520, 1925 Ore. LEXIS 92

CourtOregon Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 15, 1925

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 238 P. 1119 (Claggett v. Claggett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Claggett v. Claggett, 238 P. 1119, 236 P. 482, 115 Or. 520, 1925 Ore. LEXIS 92 (Or. 1925).

Pincite

Opinions

PEE CUEIAM.

On the twenty-sixth day of April, 1924, the plaintiff secured a decree of divorce from the defendant together with an order directing payment of attorneys’ fees and certain sums for the care and maintenance of their minor children.

It was further ordered that the custody of one of the minor children, Thomas Claggett, be given to one Harriet Miller. It now appears from affidavits, which are considered sufficient, and from the record, that the defendant has appealed to this court and furnished an undertaking covering costs and disbursements on appeal, and all damages that may accrue; but that in fact he has so conducted himself in respect to the plaintiff as to place her in fear of her life and of great bodily harm on his account; that since the pendency of the appeal here he has in every way striven to annoy and harass her, and that, pursuant to threats to that effect, he has taken the minor, *522 Thomas Claggett, out of the state and to the state of California.

For the appellant there was a brief by Mr. Walter C. Winslow. For the respondent there was a brief over the name of Mr. Carey F. Martin.

The bond furnished by him could' not possibly cover any damages occasioned by his taking the child out of the state, or by his refusing to comply with any order that the court might make on appeal in regard thereto; and it is now ordered that within twenty days from the date of this order he shall return said Thomas Claggett, minor, to this state and to the custody of the sqid Harriet Miller, and that, if he shall fail to comply with this order, the decree of the lower court shall be affirmed. A party will not be permitted to use his privilege of appeal as a means of harassing and annoying the opposite party, or to obtain an undue advantage in respect to jurisdictional matters, in case the decree should finally be affirmed.

The postoffice address of said Claggett not being-known, it'is ordered and directed that a copy of this order be served upon W. C. Winslow, his attorney appearing for him in this court.

Motion Allowed. •

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PEE CUEIAM.

On the twenty-sixth day of April, 1924, the plaintiff secured a decree of divorce from the defendant together with an order directing payment of attorneys’ fees and certain sums for the care and maintenance of their minor children.

It was further ordered that the custody of one of the minor children, Thomas Claggett, be given to one Harriet Miller. It now appears from affidavits, which are considered sufficient, and from the record, that the defendant has appealed to this court and furnished an undertaking covering costs and disbursements on appeal, and all damages that may accrue; but that in fact he has so conducted himself in respect to the plaintiff as to place her in fear of her life and of great bodily harm on his account; that since the pendency of the appeal here he has in every way striven to annoy and harass her, and that, pursuant to threats to that effect, he has taken the minor, *522 Thomas Claggett, out of the state and to the state of California.

For the appellant there was a brief by Mr. Walter C. Winslow. For the respondent there was a brief over the name of Mr. Carey F. Martin.

The bond furnished by him could' not possibly cover any damages occasioned by his taking the child out of the state, or by his refusing to comply with any order that the court might make on appeal in regard thereto; and it is now ordered that within twenty days from the date of this order he shall return said Thomas Claggett, minor, to this state and to the custody of the sqid Harriet Miller, and that, if he shall fail to comply with this order, the decree of the lower court shall be affirmed. A party will not be permitted to use his privilege of appeal as a means of harassing and annoying the opposite party, or to obtain an undue advantage in respect to jurisdictional matters, in case the decree should finally be affirmed.

The postoffice address of said Claggett not being-known, it'is ordered and directed that a copy of this order be served upon W. C. Winslow, his attorney appearing for him in this court.

Motion Allowed. •

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 P. 1119, 236 P. 482, 115 Or. 520, 1925 Ore. LEXIS 92, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claggett-v-claggett-or-1925.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack