Shanahan v. Klyn

Michigan Supreme Court

Shanahan v. Klyn

255 N.W. 733, 268 Mich. 120, 1934 Mich. LEXIS 759

Michigan Supreme Court·Decided July 2, 1934·No. Docket No. 113, Calendar No. 37,247.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

Fead, J.

Alimony is a matter of decree of court, not of contract. Eddy v. Eddy, 264 Mich. 328. A stipulation of parties does not modify a decree. The stipulation at bar was not incorporated into a modified decree by the court and, therefore, amounted to no more than an agreement, or a receipt or forgiveness of the alimony due in excess of $400. The $400 was owing, not as a debt by private agreement but by force of the decree, and remained enforceable under it by contempt proceedings.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

*121 North, Butzel, Bushnell, and Edward M. Sharpe, JJ., concurred with Fead, J.

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

Fead, J.

Alimony is a matter of decree of court, not of contract. Eddy v. Eddy, 264 Mich. 328. A stipulation of parties does not modify a decree. The stipulation at bar was not incorporated into a modified decree by the court and, therefore, amounted to no more than an agreement, or a receipt or forgiveness of the alimony due in excess of $400. The $400 was owing, not as a debt by private agreement but by force of the decree, and remained enforceable under it by contempt proceedings.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

*121 North, Butzel, Bushnell, and Edward M. Sharpe, JJ., concurred with Fead, J.

Shanahan v. Klyn, 255 N.W. 733, 268 Mich. 120, 1934 Mich. LEXIS 759 (Mich. 1934).

Pincite

255 N.W. 733 (Shanahan v. Klyn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related