Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gilcrease v. Gilcrease

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided December 12, 1939No. 27704Published

1DissentGibson, J.

Admittedly here the award to the wife was not in any sense a settlement of property rights, and the divorce decree was granted the husband because of the fault of the wife. I agree that the exact question has not been presented heretofore, and for that reason, among others, I fail to see that the case of Flaxman v. Flaxman, 177 Okla. 28, 57 P. 2d 819, furnishes a rule by which the question should be decided. In fact the Flaxman Case, in discussing the former opinion in the same case, states:

“In other words, we extended a rule arising from the particular wording of our alimony statute, and…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Emerson v. EmersonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1913
  2. Cohen v. CohenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Bussey v. BusseySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
  4. Bowen v. BowenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938
  5. Newberry v. NewberrySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API