In re Dissolution of Marriage of Lazor

Summary

The court held that a separation agreement requiring child-support payments until the child reached the "age of majority" terminated those payments when the child turned eighteen. It reasoned that the phrase has an unambiguous statutory meaning and that the agreement contained no language adopting a different meaning, so the appellee was not in contempt. Justice Douglas, dissenting, would have held that the statutory duty to support a child attending high school continues beyond age eighteen.