Prevenas v. Prevenas

Nebraska Supreme Court

Prevenas v. Prevenas

227 N.W.2d 29, 193 Neb. 399, 1975 Neb. LEXIS 987

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 27, 1975

Docket39856

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 227 N.W.2d 29 (Prevenas v. Prevenas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Prevenas v. Prevenas, 227 N.W.2d 29, 193 Neb. 399, 1975 Neb. LEXIS 987 (Neb. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an action for dissolution of a marriage. The petitioner, Peter Prevenas, has appealed from a judgment of the District Court awarding custody of the parties’ minor child to the appellee, together with child support in the amount of $150 per month and alimony consisting of a lump sum payment of $2,000, monthly payments of $200 for 11 months, and payments of $150 per month for the following 24-month period. Although the judgment of the District Court was not superseded, the appellant has failed to comply with that part of the judgment requiring monthly child support payments.

The appellee has moved to dismiss the appeal. This court has previously held that an appeal may be dismissed for contumacious violation of an order of the District Court. An appellant who fails to comply with *400 an order of the court is not in a position to seek judicial assistance. Kartman v. Cook, 189 Neb. 159, 201 N. W. 2d 705. Numerous other courts have reached a similar result when confronted with this problem. See, Annotation, 49 A. L. R. 2d 1425; Stewart v. Stewart, 91 Ariz. 356, 372 P. 2d 697; Hopp v. James, 470 S. W. 2d 716 (Tex. Civ. App.); Rude v. Rude, 153 Cal. App. 2d 243, 314 P. 2d 226.

Upon failure of the appellant to comply with the order of the trial court and make a proper showing of such compliance in this court within 20 days from the date this opinion is filed, the appeal shall stand dismissed.

Motion to dismiss conditionally sustained.

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

Per Curiam.

This is an action for dissolution of a marriage. The petitioner, Peter Prevenas, has appealed from a judgment of the District Court awarding custody of the parties’ minor child to the appellee, together with child support in the amount of $150 per month and alimony consisting of a lump sum payment of $2,000, monthly payments of $200 for 11 months, and payments of $150 per month for the following 24-month period. Although the judgment of the District Court was not superseded, the appellant has failed to comply with that part of the judgment requiring monthly child support payments.

The appellee has moved to dismiss the appeal. This court has previously held that an appeal may be dismissed for contumacious violation of an order of the District Court. An appellant who fails to comply with *400 an order of the court is not in a position to seek judicial assistance. Kartman v. Cook, 189 Neb. 159, 201 N. W. 2d 705. Numerous other courts have reached a similar result when confronted with this problem. See, Annotation, 49 A. L. R. 2d 1425; Stewart v. Stewart, 91 Ariz. 356, 372 P. 2d 697; Hopp v. James, 470 S. W. 2d 716 (Tex. Civ. App.); Rude v. Rude, 153 Cal. App. 2d 243, 314 P. 2d 226.

Upon failure of the appellant to comply with the order of the trial court and make a proper showing of such compliance in this court within 20 days from the date this opinion is filed, the appeal shall stand dismissed.

Motion to dismiss conditionally sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 N.W.2d 29, 193 Neb. 399, 1975 Neb. LEXIS 987, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prevenas-v-prevenas-neb-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack