From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McDonald v. McDonald

Colorado Court of Appeals
Sep 10, 1981
634 P.2d 1031 (Colo. App. 1981)

Summary

In McDonald v. McDonald, 634 P.2d 1031 (Colo.App. 1981), a URESA action was initiated in Texas, the father/obligor resided in Colorado, and the mother and child in Texas. Under URESA, the case was transferred from Texas to the resident state of the obligor, father.

Summary of this case from In re Marriage of McCabe

Opinion

No. 80CA1158

Decided September 10, 1981.

Appeal from the District Court of Arapahoe County, Honorable John P. Gately, Judge.

Robert R. Gallagher, Jr., District Attorney for Arapahoe County, Patrick J. Delaney, Deputy District Attorney, for petitioner-appellant.

No appearance for respondent-appellee.

Division II.


The petitioner-mother appeals a judgment entered pursuant to the Revised Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, § 14-5-101, et seq., C.R.S. 1973 (1980 Cum. Supp.). We reverse in part and affirm in part.

In 1964 the parties were divorced in Oklahoma and the father was ordered to pay child support in the amount of $50 per month to the mother for their child, Gary, born May 15, 1962. From June 19, 1964, until March of 1977, the father has resided in Oklahoma, and, since March 1977, has resided in Colorado. The mother has resided in Texas with Gary since 1964.

The mother instituted this action by filing a petition for support in 1979 in Texas. Service was obtained on the father in Colorado. Following a hearing in Colorado, he was ordered to pay $9,350, the amount of support arrearage accrued from June 19, 1964, to May 15, 1980, when the child became eighteen.

The mother contends that the district court erred in applying Oklahoma law to determine that the age of emancipation was 18 in this case, and that, therefore, the father's duty to support his son ceased to exist on May 15, 1980. We agree.

Section 14-5-108, C.R.S. 1973, provides that the duty of support under the Revised Uniform Act shall be that duty imposed under the laws of any state where the obligor was present for the period during which support is sought. Having resided in Colorado since 1977, the father is bound by Colorado law to provide support for his son until such time as the child becomes emancipated or attains 21 years of age. Van Orman v. Van Orman, 30 Colo. App. 177, 492 P.2d 81 (1971). The district court should have applied Colorado law to determine the father's liability for child support after May 15, 1980.

The judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

JUDGE STERNBERG and JUDGE TURSI concur.


Summaries of

McDonald v. McDonald

Colorado Court of Appeals
Sep 10, 1981
634 P.2d 1031 (Colo. App. 1981)

In McDonald v. McDonald, 634 P.2d 1031 (Colo.App. 1981), a URESA action was initiated in Texas, the father/obligor resided in Colorado, and the mother and child in Texas. Under URESA, the case was transferred from Texas to the resident state of the obligor, father.

Summary of this case from In re Marriage of McCabe

In McDonald v. McDonald, 634 P.2d 1031 (Colo.App. 1981), we held that a trial court must apply Colorado law to determine a child's eligibility for child support if the payor has been present in Colorado during the period for which support is sought, regardless of the provisions of law in the state where the support order was entered.

Summary of this case from Napolitano v. Napolitano
Case details for

McDonald v. McDonald

Case Details

Full title:Patricia P. McDonald v. Bobby E. McDonald

Court:Colorado Court of Appeals

Date published: Sep 10, 1981

Citations

634 P.2d 1031 (Colo. App. 1981)

Citing Cases

State of Kan., ex Rel. Adams v. Adams

Since Gale is an "obligor" as defined by statute, SDCL 25-9A-1(8), and resided in this state during the…

Ross v. Thomas

This order was entitled a "Declaration of Emancipation" and "ordered" that no further child support payments…