Case Name: SHANAHAN v. KLYN
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1934-07-02
Citations: 268 Mich. 120
Docket Number: Docket No. 113, Calendar No. 37,247
Parties: SHANAHAN v. KLYN.
Judges: North, Butzel, Bushnell, and Edward M. Sharpe, JJ., concurred with Fead, J.
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 268
Pages: 120–122

Head Matter:
SHANAHAN v. KLYN.
Garnishment — Alimony—Stipulation.
Sum, due from husband under stipulation in divorce proceeding which had not been incorporated in modified decree and which merely amounted to wife’s receipt or forgiveness of portion of alimony then due, held, not subject to garnishment by judgment creditor of wife.
Sharp®, O. J., and Potter and Wiest, JJ., dissenting.
Appeal from Kent; Yerdier (Leonard D.), J.
Submitted April 17, 1934.
(Docket No. 113, Calendar No. 37,247.)
Decided July 2, 1934.
Garnishment proceedings by Camilla Shanahan, doing business as La Mode Chez Nous, against Geneva Y. Klyn, principal defendant, and George B. Klyn, garnishee defendant. Judgment for garnishee defendant. Plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Dunham & Sherk, for plaintiff.
Knappen, Uhl, Bryant & Snow, for garnishee defendant.

Opinion:
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.
North, Butzel, Bushnell, and Edward M. Sharpe, JJ., concurred with Fead, J.