About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

40 Colum. L. Rev. 373 (1940)
The Recognition of Foreign Divorce Decrees in New York State

handle is hein.journals/clr40 and id is 415 raw text is: COLUMBIA LAW REVIEW VOL. XL MARCH, 1940 NO. 3 THE RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN DIVORCE DECREES IN NEW YORK STATE* It has often been said that the New York law as to the recognition of foreign divorce decrees is peculiar.' The specific peculiarity most commonly mentioned is the doctrine which secured constitutional sanc- tion in Haddock v. Haddock2--the doctrine that a divorce secured at the domicil of the libellant need not be recognized elsewhere if the libellee, failing to appear in the divorce proceedings, was neither domiciled in that state nor served with process there. The decision of the Supreme Court did not, of course, mean that a divorce decree granted in such cir- cumstances could not constitutionally be given effect elsewhere; it only meant that it need not be recognized. Since the Haddock case was de- cided, the New York courts have continued to exercise their constitu- tional privilege and, in the absence of special circumstances giving rise to a so-called estoppel, have refused to recognize such decrees as that which came in question in Haddock v. Haddock.3 The characteristics of the New York law which are said to make it peculiar can be understood only if one keeps in mind the doctrines which are orthodox. I think Professor Beale would not resent the suggestion that the best place to find a clear statement of orthodox belief is in his Treatise on the Conflict of Laws. As a preliminary to his discussion of the problems of jurisdiction to divorce he sets forth certain general propositions which may fairly be considered as orthodox. He asserts that marriage is a status and that the state of domicil of the parties to a status is the state which is generally agreed in our law to * The subject of this paper was discussed by its author on May 1, 1939, at the second annual Law Institute conducted by the Faculty of the Law School of The University of Buffalo under the auspices of its Alumni Association. 'See Greene, The Enforcement of a Foreign Divorce Decree in New York (1926) 11 CoRN'. L. Q. 141; 1 BEALE CONFLICT OF LAWS (1935) §§ 111.4, 113.4; GOODRICH, CONFLICT OF LAWS (1927) § 127; STUMBERG, CONFLICT OF LAWS (1937) 271, 276; Saxe, Inter-State Divorce (1933) 5 N.Y. STATE BAR AssN. BuLL. 395. 2201 U. S. 562 (1906). See Bingham, The American Law Institute vs. The Supreme Court, It the Matter of Haddock v. Haddock (1936) 21 CORN. L. Q. 393. 'See Olmsted v. Olmsted, 190 N. Y. 458, 83 N. E. 569 (1908), aff'd, 216 U. S. 386 (1910) ; Fischer v. Fischer, 254 N.Y. 463, 173 N. E. 680 (1930).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most