From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lackey v. Lackey

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jun 1, 1977
564 P.2d 293 (Or. Ct. App. 1977)

Opinion

No. D-1312, CA 7307

Argued May 16, 1977

Affirmed June 1, 1977

Appeal from Circuit Court, Washington County.

Hollie M. Pihl, Judge.

Irvin D. Smith, Burns, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Constance C. Jarvis, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent.

Before Schwab, Chief judge, and Lee and Richardson, Judges.

PER CURIAM.


Affirmed. Costs to respondent.


This appeal arises out of a show-cause hearing in which the father unsuccessfully sought an order of court giving him custody of his three daughters, aged 11, 13 and 17.

We do not reach the merits. Pursuant to stipulation the trial judge interviewed the three girls without a record's being made of the interview. In Beelman v. Beelman, 227 Or. 556, 361 P.2d 663,363 P.2d 561 (1961), and Schuyler v. Haggart, 224 Or. 530, 356 P.2d 955 (1960), the Supreme Court held that if the appellant in a divorce proceeding does not provide the appellate court with a transcript of a private interview conducted by the judge with a witness, then he has waived his right to trial de novo and the decree below must be affirmed. See also Nichols v. Nichols, 3 Or. App. 103, 471 P.2d 841 (1970), and Green v. Haugen, 1 Or. App. 1, 457 P.2d 655 (1969).

Affirmed. Costs to respondent.


Summaries of

Lackey v. Lackey

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jun 1, 1977
564 P.2d 293 (Or. Ct. App. 1977)
Case details for

Lackey v. Lackey

Case Details

Full title:LACKEY, Respondent, v. LACKEY, Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Jun 1, 1977

Citations

564 P.2d 293 (Or. Ct. App. 1977)
564 P.2d 293

Citing Cases

Meader v. Meader

That rule has been applied to preclude de novo review in custody cases where interviews with children in…