McNeil v. Peschke

Fairfax County Circuit Court

McNeil v. Peschke

18 Va. Cir. 31, 1988 Va. Cir. LEXIS 328

CourtFairfax County Circuit Court

DecidedMay 26, 1988

DocketCase No. (Chancery) 106064

StatusPublished

This text of 18 Va. Cir. 31 (McNeil v. Peschke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Fairfax County Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McNeil v. Peschke, 18 Va. Cir. 31, 1988 Va. Cir. LEXIS 328 (Va. Super. Ct. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

By JUDGE THOMAS J. MIDDLETON

This matter is before the Court on Motion of the Complainant, Marguerite E. McNeil, to refer this case to a Commissioner in Chancery for partition of certain marital property. The motion is denied at this time.

On January 26, 1988, the Complainant was granted an ex parte divorce by the Superior Court of Puerto Rico. The Complainant requests that this Court afford full faith and credit to that decree for the purposes of the present action for partition. However, this Court cannot determine from the record of the foreign court that domicile and jurisdiction were proper. In an ex parte divorce proceeding if the jurisdiction rendering the divorce was the domicile of the complaining spouse, the divorce decree is entitled to recognition. However, a Virginia court may look behind the foreign court’s determination to make certain it in fact had jurisdiction. See, Williams v. North Carolina, 325 U.S. 226 (1945).

Since this Court cannot determine from the record whether the Complainant was properly domiciled in Puerto Rico, it cannot afford full faith and credit to the present foreign decree. Further, this Court finds that the Defendant cannot use the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act, 50 U.S.C. sect. 501, et seq., to indefinitely stay these proceedings.

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

By JUDGE THOMAS J. MIDDLETON

This matter is before the Court on Motion of the Complainant, Marguerite E. McNeil, to refer this case to a Commissioner in Chancery for partition of certain marital property. The motion is denied at this time.

On January 26, 1988, the Complainant was granted an ex parte divorce by the Superior Court of Puerto Rico. The Complainant requests that this Court afford full faith and credit to that decree for the purposes of the present action for partition. However, this Court cannot determine from the record of the foreign court that domicile and jurisdiction were proper. In an ex parte divorce proceeding if the jurisdiction rendering the divorce was the domicile of the complaining spouse, the divorce decree is entitled to recognition. However, a Virginia court may look behind the foreign court’s determination to make certain it in fact had jurisdiction. See, Williams v. North Carolina, 325 U.S. 226 (1945).

Since this Court cannot determine from the record whether the Complainant was properly domiciled in Puerto Rico, it cannot afford full faith and credit to the present foreign decree. Further, this Court finds that the Defendant cannot use the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act, 50 U.S.C. sect. 501, et seq., to indefinitely stay these proceedings.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 Va. Cir. 31, 1988 Va. Cir. LEXIS 328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcneil-v-peschke-vaccfairfax-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack