Legal Document

334 U.S. 555 68 Supreme Court Reporter 1221 92 L.Ed. 1572 KREIGERv.KREIGER. Number 371. Argued Feb. 2, 3, 1948. Decided June 7, Mr. James G. Purdy, of New York City, for petitioner. Charles Rothenberg, respondent. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion Court. 1 This is a companion case to Estin versus Estin, 541, 1213, also here on certiorari Appeals York. 2 The parties were married in 1933 and lived together until their separation 1935. In 1940 respondent obtained decree grounds abandonment. Petitioner appeared action; was awarded $60 week alimony support herself only child, whose custody she given. 3 thereafter went Nevada where he continues reside. He instituted divorce proceedings that state fall 1944. Constructive service made who no appearance proceedings. While they pending, an order purporting enjoin petitioner from seeking remarrying. neither served with process nor entered latter proceeding. court, knowledge injunction judgment alimony, absolute three consecutive years without cohabitation. provision alimony. It did provide support, maintain educate it purported grant him, as which jurisdiction reserved. tendered $50 month child but ceased making payments under decree. 4 Respondent thereupon brought suit federal district court Nevada. Without waiting outcome litigation amount arrears, appearing unsuccessfully pleading his defense. affirmed by Appellate Division, two judges dissenting. 271 App.Div. 872, 66 N.Y.S.2d 798. opinion, stating its remittitur action based upon 296 N.Y. 308, 73 North Eastern Reporter, 2nd Series 113. does not attack bona fides petitioner's domicile. 5 For reasons stated supra, we hold had power adjudicate respondent's rights thus required bow therefore unnecessary pass York's attempt securing or reach question whether entitled full faith credit No issue raised either below this affirmed. 6 Affirmed. 7 FRANKFURTER dissents dissenting supra. 8 JACKSON set forth

Classification Label: 10