Opinion
8 Div. 221.
February 23, 1967.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Madison County, John W. Green, Jr., J.
Bell, Richardson, Cleary, McLain Tucker, Huntsville, for appellant.
Judicial power to grant a divorce — jurisdiction, strictly speaking — is founded on domicile, and the domicile of one spouse within a state is necessary to give that state power to dissolve a marriage. Williams v. State of North Carolina, 317 U.S. 287, 63 S.Ct. 207, 87 L.Ed. 279; Bell v. Bell, 181 U.S. 175, 21 S.Ct 551, 45 L.Ed. 804; Hartigan v. Hartigan, 272 Ala. 67, 128 So.2d 725; Brown v. Brown, (Fla.App.), 123 So.2d 382; Williams v. State of North Carolina, 325 U.S. 226, 65 S.Ct. 1092, 89 L.Ed. 1577; Andrews v. Andrews, 188 U.S. 14, 23 S.Ct. 237, 47 L.Ed. 366; Wilkes v. Wilkes, 245 Ala. 54, 16 So.2d 15; Wells v. Wells, 230 Ala. 430, 161 So.2d 794; Fox v. Fox, 235 Ala. 338, 179 So. 237; Jennings v. Jennings, 251 Ala. 73, 36 So.2d 236, 3 A.L.R.2d 662. The domicile of a wife is that of her husband, and a wife cannot leave her husband and acquire a separate domicile without legally sufficient cause or excuse. Hanberry v. Hanberry, 29 Ala. 719; Sparkman v. Sparkman, 20 Ala. App. 50, 100 So. 621; Jones v. Jones, 233 Ala. 642, 173 So. 49; McIntyre v. McIntyre (Fla.), 53 So.2d 824. Spafford v. Spafford, 199 Ala. 300, 74 So. 354, L.R.A. 1917O, 773; Henderson v. Henderson, 228 Ala. 438, 153 So. 646; Winkles v. Powell, 173 Ala. 46, 55 So. 536; Herron v. Passailaigue, 92 Fla. 818, 110 So. 539; Minich v. Minich, 111 Fla. 469, 149 So. 483.
Watts, Salmon, Roberts Stephens and Paul L. Millirons, Huntsville, for appellee.
To fall within the exception to the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution of the United States, Article IV, Section I, that allows the courts of one state to go behind the decrees of a sister state, it must be shown that the jurisdictional requirements of the state whose decree is attacked are not fulfilled. Sherrer v. Sherrer, 334 U.S. 343, 68 S.Ct. 1087, 92 L.Ed. 1429, 1 A.L.R. 2d 1355; Coe v. Coe, 334 U.S. 378, 68 S.Ct. 1094, 92 L.Ed. 1451; Davis v. Davis, 305 U.S. 32, 59 S.Ct. 3, 83 L.Ed. 26; Ex Parte Aufill, 268 Ala. 43, 104 So.2d 897. Who is at fault in a separation has no relevancy to jurisdiction or the existence of state's power to enter the divorce. Williams v. State of North Carolina, 317 U.S. 287, 63 S.Ct. 207, 87 L.Ed. 279. The jurisdictional requirement of domicile is freed from confusing refinements about matrimonial domicile. Williams v. State of North Carolina, 325 U.S. 226, 65 S.Ct. 1092, 89 L.Ed. 1577. Under the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution, Article IV, Section I, a woman may, of her own choice, regardless of fault, acquire a domicile separate from that of her husband, at least as far as concerns a divorce action. 17 Am.Jur., Divorce Separation, § 293; 17A Am.Jur., Divorce Separation, § 950; Williams v. State of North Carolina, supra, Same (2d App.), supra; Boardman v. Boardman, 135 Conn. 124, 62 A.2d 521, 13 A.L.R.2d 295; Brown v. Brown (Fla.App.), 123 So.2d 382.
Appeal by the complainant (husband) from a final decree dismissing his bill for divorce filed in the circuit court of Madison County, in equity. The dismissal resulted from the sustaining of the wife's plea setting up a Florida divorce decree in her favor, which she contends is entitled to full faith and credit in Alabama under Article IV, Section 1, Constitution of the United States.
The basic and decisive question presented on this appeal, stated succinctly, is whether a wife, domiciled with her husband in Alabama, can abandon the husband without just cause, move to Florida and there acquire a separate domicile so as to give a court in Florida jurisdiction of a suit for divorce brought by the wife — the husband continuing to be domiciled in Alabama and not submitting to the jurisdiction of the Florida court. If so, there is no dispute that full faith and credit must be given in Alabama to a divorce decree rendered in favor of the wife in such suit where, as here, the requirements of procedural due process have been met. The trial court held, in effect, that the wife could acquire such separate domicile in Florida, thereby giving the Florida court jurisdiction of the wife's divorce suit, and that a divorce decree rendered in such suit is entitled to full faith and credit in Alabama. We concur in that holding and affirm the decree appealed from. See: Atherton v. Atherton, 181 U.S. 155, 21 S.Ct. 544, 45 L.Ed. 794; Bell v. Bell, 181 U.S. 175, 177-178, 2 S.Ct. 551, 45 L.Ed. 804; Hartigan v. Hartigan, 272 Ala. 67, 71-72, 128 So.2d 725; Williams v. State of North Carolina, 317 U.S. 287, 63 S.Ct. 207, 87 L.Ed. 279, 143 A.L.R. 1273; Williams v. State of North Carolina, 325 U.S. 226, 65 S.Ct. 1092, 89 L.Ed. 1577, 157 A.L.R. 1366; Ragovis v. Ragovis, Sup., 124 N.Y.S.2d 655; McKie v. McKie, Sup., 72 N.Y.S.2d 798; Boardman v. Boardman, 135 Conn. 124, 62 A.2d 521, 13 A.L.R.2d 295; Epstein v. Epstein, 193 Md. 164, 66 A.2d 381; 24 Am.Jur.2d, Divorce and Separation, §§ 258, 260 and 950; 27B C.J.S. Divorce § 338.
For purposes of the decision, the husband's charge that the wife left him without just cause, which the wife denies, has been assumed to be true. The issue of just cause has not been decided.
Affirmed.
LIVINGSTON, C. J., and LAWSON and COLEMAN, JJ., concur.