The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1907-06-29
Certain Judgments Only Rem
dered in Other States Can
Be Enforced in Utah,
c. N. MONROE WINS OUT
in HIS CONTENTION
Supreme Tribunal Affirms a
Decision of the Third Dis
trict Court.

An important opinion, affecting the
enforceability in Utah of alimony jude.
ments rendered IN others States, was
handed down by the Supreme court
Tuesday, In brief the court holds that
an action on Judgment for alimony
or mnintenances rendered by a com
petent court in another State may be
enforced in Utah, under the ''full faith
and credit section of the federal con-
stitution, where the sum due and pay
able is a fixed and definite sum.
The court holds. however, that a
Judgment for ahmony or maintenance.
to be paid monthly and in iustallments,
is not final judgment, and where rem
dered IN another State, action upon it
cannot be maintained in the courts of
Utah under the 'tfull faith and cred
it provision.
Monroe Need Not Pay.
One affect of the court s decision will
be to release c. II. Monroe, a local
photographer, from paying sos for tha
support of his two children which he
was directed to pay by a Denver court,
for the opinion Of the Supreme court
was rendered in Monroe s case.
Monroe was sued by Herbert L. Hunt
of Denver In tho Third District court.
Hunt set up that when Monroe s wife
was divorced in the Denver courts
Monroe WAS directed by the court to
pay him (HunD, as trustee, $40 a month
for the support of his two children.
Hunt waited until Monroe was delin-
quent In the sum of sos before bring.
ing suit.
Monroe demurrcd to the complaint on
two grounds. One was that Hunt was
In no way party In interest to the
almony judgment. either as q benef,
cIary or as an assignee; also that the
Judgment was not of such a character
ms to bring it within the "full faith
and credit provision. This demurrer
was overruled in the District court,
and judgment was rendered against
Monroe for the full amount. He ap.
pealed to the Supreme court.
The supreme court sustains both con.
tentjous raised by Monroe on his de.
murrer in the lower court In an opin.
ion written by Justice Frick and con
Cured in by the other members of the
court. IT held that Hunt is not prop
er party IN interest. and that an ali
mony judgment, payable in install
ments, is not a final Judgment. and thai
where rendered in another State is not
enforceable in the courts of Utah The
decision of the lower court is reversed
and that tribunal is instructed to sus.
tain Monroe's demurrer
Lower Court Is Affirmed.
The Supreme court on Thursday also
handed down an opinion affirming the
decision Of the Third District court in
the case of the / X l. Furniture g.
Carpet Installmeut House, appellant
VS.. Louis Berets et al. This suit was
brought to compel tho specific perfor-
nance OF contract. 10 enjoin the
defendants from inter cring with the
complainant in the possession Of Ger.
tain property.
II was alleged that the company held
lease on the property IN question
which lease expired December 81. 1906
The lease provided that. should the com
pany wish an extension, such was to
be granted for three years. In the
lower court demurrer 10 the com
plant was sustained. The point for the
Supreme court 10 decide was whether
or not the company asked for the ex-
tension at the proper time, and the
court sffirms the decision of the lower
court in sustaining the demurrer.