Opinion ID: 2549213
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: the extent of the district court's subject-matter jurisdiction in post-decree stages

Text: ¶ 9 The district court's authority to approve an on-the-record agreement clearly includes the power to enforce the parties' pacts through post-decree modification proceedings brought upon the family-and-domestic docket (under the earlier-assigned cause number). ¶ 10 Once an interspousal agreement is approved and incorporated into the decree, the parties' private contract stands converted to a solemn judicially enforceable obligation of record which is no longer one of a purely private-law (or contractual) character. [18] Because a mid-divorce, on-the-record promise to provide support for one's disabled adult child may be enforced in post-decree proceedings, the claim falls within the family-and-domestic docket boundary. [19] In that sense and for that purpose this district court docket may be said to include all promise-generated, post-decree issues to the end that the same enforcement remedies stand accorded all decree-bottomed obligations those that are solely statute-based as well as those that derive from approved interspousal pacts. [20] ¶ 11 We need not be concerned here about the custodial Mother's post-decree standing as a Hohfeldian [21] plaintiff to enforce Father's on-the-record promise. She is the obligee of a court-approved agreement as well as a co-contributor of support for her adult child. In that dual capacity she would be entitled to standing both as the beneficiary of an enforceable promise (if it proves to qualify under that category) as well as the actual provider of support for which legal liability will now extend to both parents. [22]