Court Opinion

ID: 9784728
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 20:52:32.84631+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:35:58.556088
License: Public Domain

ADAMS, Presiding Judge,
dissenting:
T1 As I view this record, this case is materially indistinguishable from Chastain v. Posey, 1983 OK 46, 665 P.2d 1179. In both cases the challenge to the entitlement to a divorce was not raised until after the trial court had made an effective pronouncement of the divorcee and dissolved the marriage. The Legislature has made it clear in 12 § 696.2(E) that "the adjudication of any issue" in a divorce case is "enforceable when pronounced by the court." This provision was not effective at the time the order appealed in Marszette v. Marzette, 1994 OK CIV APP 88, 882 P.2d 578, was issued, and as recognized in that case, its provisions were not considered.1 I respectfully dissent to the decision to vacate the divorcee decree, and I would consider the remainder of Wife's arguments for reversal.2

. In Marzefte, the surviving party did not appeal the granting of the divorce or any other provisions of the trial court's order. The Court raised the validity of the divorce sue sponte without considering the effect of Chastain.

. Inasmuch as the majority has concluded otherwise, I do not express any opinion on those issues.