Holleyman v. Holleyman
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1Dissent
BOUDREAU, J.,
with whom LAVENDER and WINCHESTER, JJ., join, dissenting:
T1 I dissent because there is a major difference between enforcing an agreement between a husband and wife that obligates one or the other to pay child support after a child reaches majority, and enforcing an agreement which attempts to vest the court with jurisdiction to determine a child support obligation after the child reaches majority. Enforcing the latter agreement impermissi-bly allows the parties to confer jurisdiction upon the court to pronounce a particular decision that the Legislature has not currently extended…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n, Chickasha, Oklahoma v. NathSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1992
- Stork v. StorkSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
- Halliburton Oil Producing Co. v. GrothausSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1998
- State v. PokiniHawaii Supreme Court · 1976
- Whitehead v. WhiteheadSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1999
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.