Case ID: colo_7/html/0012-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Helm, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Israel v. Arthur, Administrator, et al.
    The decease of the husband after a decree of divorce is granted, and before proceedings in error thereon are instituted, does not operate to prevent a review of the decree when property rights are involved.
    
      Error to County Court of Larimer County.
    
    Messrs. Haynes, Dunning and Haynes, for plaintiff in error.
    Messrs. Wells, Smith and Macon, and Messrs. Rhodes and Love, Ballard, Barnum and McOord, for defendant in error.
   Helm, J.

John Arthur, now deceased, in his life-time brought suit and obtained a decree of divorce against his wife, who is the plaintiff in error herein. This writ is prosecuted for the purpose of reversing that decree.

The record of proceedings in that cause shows on its face that the court acted without obtaining jurisdiction of the person of the defendant. In the case of Israel v. Arthur et al. ante, p. 5, we have fully considered this record, and declared the proceedings of the county court therein void and of no effect. The judgment and decree must be reversed.

This court has held that the decease of the husband after a decree of divorce is granted, and before proceedings in error thereon are instituted, does not operate to prevent a review and reversal of the decree.

That “when property rights are involved, as in this case, the same reason exists for determining its validity as in civil cases generally.” Israel v. Arthur, 6 Col. 85.

Reversed.