Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

60 Okla. 217

159 P 1107

Yates v. Yates

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided September 12, 1916

Supreme Court of Oklahoma · decided 1916-09-12

<p>Error from Superior Court, Pottawatomie County; Leander G. Pitman, judge.</p> <p>Action by Georgia Bell Yates against J. AY. Mates. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Appeal dismissed · Decided 1916-09-12

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 2015

1 district · 10 state decisions

5019161920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 Opinion by

MATHEAYS, C.

¶2 This was an action for divorce and alimony. Upon the trial being had, the court refused plaintiff’s prayer for a divorce, but granted a divorce to defendant upon his cross-petition. The court also allowed plaintiff alimony in the sum of $500, and the further sum of $15.0 for her attorney, and provided that the amount theretofore allowed for temporary alimony be deducted from the amount therein .allowed, and that the balance be paid to-the clerk for the use and benefit of the *218 plaintiff. The plaintiff took an appeal from the overruling of her motion for a new trial, and the same was perfected and filed in this court.

¶3 Defendant has now filed a motion to dismiss this appeal, and as a basis therefor files an affidavit made by the court clerk •of Pottawatomie county, to the effect that •on December 28, 1915, after the court had rendered his decree in this cause, the defendant paid into the hands of said clerk the sum of $450, for the use of the plaintiff, and that on December 30, 1915, the plaintiff through her attorney was paid out ■of said money the sum of $445.50, being the balance due on said alimony judgment. After having voluntarily accepted the money paid in on the judgment for her use and benefit, it follows that she is- estopped from prosecuting her appeal from the judgment.

¶4 The appeal should therefore be dismissed!.

¶5 By the Court: It is so ordered.

/60/okla/217 · .json · Public domain