faith and credit clause in South Dakota

1980The case of Sistare v. Sistare, 218 U.S. 1 , 30 S.Ct. 682 , 54 L.Ed. 905 (1910), establishes the rule that the right to installments of alimony or support payments becomes absolute and vested once they become due and, accordingly, the decree requiring their payment is protected by the full faith and credit clause of the Federal Constitution, Article IV, § 1.

1980The case of Sistare v. Sistare, 218 U.S. 1 , 30 S.Ct. 682 , 54 L.Ed. 905 (1910), establishes the rule that the right to installments of alimony or support payments becomes absolute and vested once they become due and, accordingly, the decree requiring their payment is protected by the full faith and credit clause of the Federal Constitution, Article IV, § 1.

2024We first address whether full faith and credit is applicable here. [¶15.] In general, “the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution precludes any inquiry [from a sister state] into the merits of [a] cause of action, the logic or consistency of the decision, or the validity of the legal principles on which [a] judgment is based.” Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 462 , 61 S. Ct. 339, 342 , 85 L.

2024We first address whether full faith and credit is applicable here. [¶15.] In general, “the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution precludes any inquiry [from a sister state] into the merits of [a] cause of action, the logic or consistency of the decision, or the validity of the legal principles on which [a] judgment is based.” Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 462 , 61 S. Ct. 339, 342 , 85 L.

2024In Durfee, the United States Supreme Court merely recognized that the question of jurisdiction, once it has been fully litigated, is precluded from relitigation and is res judicata, via the full faith and credit clause, to the same degree as any other valid final judgment. 375 U.S. at 111 , 84 S. Ct. at 245 .

2024In Durfee, the United States Supreme Court merely recognized that the question of jurisdiction, once it has been fully litigated, is precluded from relitigation and is res judicata, via the full faith and credit clause, to the same degree as any other valid final judgment. 375 U.S. at 111 , 84 S. Ct. at 245 .

2004Signer, 533 S.W.2d at 536 . 5 .

1994Williams v. North Carolina, 317 U.S. 287, 302-03 , 63 S.Ct. 207, 215 , 87 L.Ed. 279 (1942).

1994Williams v. North Carolina, 317 U.S. 287, 302-03 , 63 S.Ct. 207, 215 , 87 L.Ed. 279 (1942).

1974Thus, in enunciating the concept of parens patriae, the Court, in Bachman v. Mejias ( 1 N.Y. 2d 575 , at page 581, 154 N.Y.S.2d 903 , at page 907, 136 N.E.2d 866 , at page 869), held that this concept ‘transcends the rule of comity’ and that this rule must ‘yield when it conflicts with the dominant domestic duty of the court to guard the welfare of its wards.

1974Thus, in enunciating the concept of parens patriae, the Court, in Bachman v. Mejias ( 1 N.Y. 2d 575 , at page 581, 154 N.Y.S.2d 903 , at page 907, 136 N.E.2d 866 , at page 869), held that this concept ‘transcends the rule of comity’ and that this rule must ‘yield when it conflicts with the dominant domestic duty of the court to guard the welfare of its wards.

1970Payment made subsequent to entry of a foreign judgment is not foreclosed under the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution of the United States, Art. 4 § 1, since it could not have been litigated in the original action. 6 Lennon v. Cohen, 264 Mass. 414 , 163 N.E. 63 .

1970Payment made subsequent to entry of a foreign judgment is not foreclosed under the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution of the United States, Art. 4 § 1, since it could not have been litigated in the original action. 6 Lennon v. Cohen, 264 Mass. 414 , 163 N.E. 63 .

1967The court then held in Levine v. Levine, 121 Or. 44 , 252 P. 972 , that such supplementaL decree was protected by the full faith and credit clause of the Federal Constitution, Art. 4, Sec. 1. *682 Under 'statutes 5 not materially at variance with 'those in the state, the North Carolina court in a suit for alimony without divorce, Barber v. Barber, 217 N.C. 422 , 8 S.E.2d 204 , said: "A judgment awarding alimony is a judgment directing the payment of money by a defendant to plaintiff and, by such judgment, the defendant thereupon becomes indebted to the plaintiff for such alimony as it becomes

1967The court then held in Levine v. Levine, 121 Or. 44 , 252 P. 972 , that such supplementaL decree was protected by the full faith and credit clause of the Federal Constitution, Art. 4, Sec. 1. *682 Under 'statutes 5 not materially at variance with 'those in the state, the North Carolina court in a suit for alimony without divorce, Barber v. Barber, 217 N.C. 422 , 8 S.E.2d 204 , said: "A judgment awarding alimony is a judgment directing the payment of money by a defendant to plaintiff and, by such judgment, the defendant thereupon becomes indebted to the plaintiff for such alimony as it becomes

1967The court then held in Levine v. Levine, 121 Or. 44 , 252 P. 972 , that such supplementaL decree was protected by the full faith and credit clause of the Federal Constitution, Art. 4, Sec. 1. *682 Under 'statutes 5 not materially at variance with 'those in the state, the North Carolina court in a suit for alimony without divorce, Barber v. Barber, 217 N.C. 422 , 8 S.E.2d 204 , said: "A judgment awarding alimony is a judgment directing the payment of money by a defendant to plaintiff and, by such judgment, the defendant thereupon becomes indebted to the plaintiff for such alimony as it becomes

1967The court then held in Levine v. Levine, 121 Or. 44 , 252 P. 972 , that such supplementaL decree was protected by the full faith and credit clause of the Federal Constitution, Art. 4, Sec. 1. *682 Under 'statutes 5 not materially at variance with 'those in the state, the North Carolina court in a suit for alimony without divorce, Barber v. Barber, 217 N.C. 422 , 8 S.E.2d 204 , said: "A judgment awarding alimony is a judgment directing the payment of money by a defendant to plaintiff and, by such judgment, the defendant thereupon becomes indebted to the plaintiff for such alimony as it becomes

1967By similar reasoning in Sorenson v. Spence, 65 S.D. 134 , 272 N.W. 179 , we recognized a Nebraska decree requiring monthly alimony payments of $30 upon which there had accrued $1,860 saying "Unless it is shown * * * that the Nebraska decree has been modified by the courts of Nebraska, this court will permit that decree to be the basis for a decree in this state.

1967By similar reasoning in Sorenson v. Spence, 65 S.D. 134 , 272 N.W. 179 , we recognized a Nebraska decree requiring monthly alimony payments of $30 upon which there had accrued $1,860 saying "Unless it is shown * * * that the Nebraska decree has been modified by the courts of Nebraska, this court will permit that decree to be the basis for a decree in this state.

1937Cas. 1061, wherein the court said: “First, that, generally speaking, where a decree is rendered for alimony and is made payable in future instalments, the right to' such instalments becomes absolute and vested upon becoming due, and is therefore protected by the full faith and credit clause, provided no modification of the decree has been made prior to the maturity of the instalments, since, as declared in the Barber Case [ 21 How. 582 , 16 L.

1937Cas. 1061, wherein the court said: “First, that, generally speaking, where a decree is rendered for alimony and is made payable in future instalments, the right to' such instalments becomes absolute and vested upon becoming due, and is therefore protected by the full faith and credit clause, provided no modification of the decree has been made prior to the maturity of the instalments, since, as declared in the Barber Case [ 21 How. 582 , 16 L.

1937Mayer v. Mayer, 154 Mich. 386 , 117 N. W. 890 , 19 L.

1937Mayer v. Mayer, 154 Mich. 386 , 117 N. W. 890 , 19 L.