White v. White

39 N.W. 277, 75 Iowa 218, 1888 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 308
Supreme Court of Iowa·Decided September 10, 1888·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

Rothrook, J.

— It is not claimed that there has been any change in the circumstances of the parties which would authorize a modification of the decree so far as it pertains to alimony or to the support of' the child. It is averred in the answer that there has been no such change. Besides, it appears from the answer that, before the decree of divorce was entered, the parties in good faith entered into an agreement in writing by which it was stipulated that in case a divorce should be granted the plaintiff should have the custody of the child, and care for and support and educate it, and the defendant should pay the plaintiff five hundred and twenty-five dollars in full of her share of their property. The case of Reid v. Reid, 74 Iowa, 681, is decisive of the case at bar. The court correctly held that the plaintiff was not entitled to the relief asked.

Aeeirmed.

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

White v. White, 39 N.W. 277, 75 Iowa 218, 1888 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 308 (iowa 1888).

39 N.W. 277 (White v. White) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Axline v. Axline
24 N.W.2d 443 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1946)
Graham v. Graham
284 N.W. 280 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1939)
Newburn v. Newburn
231 N.W. 389 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1930)
Keyser v. Keyser
193 Iowa 16 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1922)
Young v. Young
179 Iowa 1259 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1917)
Mylius ex rel. Mylius v. Cargill
19 N.M. 278 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1914)
Kinney v. Kinney
129 N.W. 826 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1911)
Slattery v. Slattery
116 N.W. 608 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1908)
Crockett v. Crockett
106 N.W. 944 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1906)
Wilson v. Elliott
73 S.W. 946 (Texas Supreme Court, 1903)
Brandt v. Brandt
67 P. 508 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1902)