Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Holleyman v. Holleyman

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided October 14, 2003No. 95,584Published

1Concurrence

OPALA, V.C.J.,

concurring.

T 1 The court holds that in this post-decree proceeding the district court has cognizance to determine the quantum of Father's obligation (if any Re have) to support his disabled adult child of a dissolved marriage. The dissent challenges for want of jurisdictional support the enforceability of Father's decree-imposed duty. Father's successful liability-defeating defense below calls on us here to retest the trial court's view that it lacked cognizance to enforce the decree-created obligation.1 I write separately to answer Father's jurisdiction-anchored argument for…

2Cases cited72 opinions

  1. Pettis v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
  2. Chamberlin v. ChamberlinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1986
  3. Flick v. CrouchSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1967
  4. Bomford v. Socony Mobil Oil Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1968
  5. Timmons v. Royal Globe Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1985

67 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