Arizona Supreme Court
Wilma Cornell Solomon and Adrienne Michelle Findley, Plaintiffs/appellants v. Lloyd Talbott Findley, Defendant/appellee
March 7, 1991167 Ariz. 409
Summary
The Arizona Supreme Court held that a post‑majority educational support provision incorporated into a divorce decree does not merge into the decree because the divorce court lacks jurisdiction to enforce support after the child reaches majority. Accordingly, the plaintiffs may pursue a separate breach‑of‑contract action. The court overruled its prior decision in Helber and approved the Court of Appeals’ judgment, remanding for further proceedings.
Holding
- Do post‑majority support provisions in a divorce settlement merge into the dissolution decree and thereby preclude a separate breach‑of‑contract action?. The post‑majority educational support provision does not merge into the dissolution decree because the divorce court lacks jurisdiction to enforce it; the plaintiffs may pursue a separate breach‑of‑contract action.
Docket CV-90-0177-PR
Cited by
- In Re the Matter Of: Lauren M. Jensen v. Peter Damien Joseph Beirne
- Roy A. Brown, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Arthur T. LaPrade, Jr., In re the Marriage of Arthur T…
- Jones v. Jones
- Susan S. Danielson (fka Evans), Petitioner/appellee v. Donald W. Evans, Respondent/appellant
- Botto v. Botto
- Nancy Louise Mendoza, Petitioner/appellant v. Joseph Robert Mendoza, Respondent/appellee
- Patricia A. Guzman, Nka Patricia Leos, Petitioner-Appellant v. William F. Guzman, Respondent-Appellee
- Sammye Sharen Walden Pursley, Appellant v. William Hoyne Pursley, Appellee