225 N.W. 11
No. 27,057.Supreme Court of Minnesota.
April 12, 1929.
Decree for alimony of wife and a child valid but subject to revision.
A judgment granting plaintiff a divorce required defendant, because of a written stipulation of the parties, to make monthly payments toward the support of plaintiff and a child living in the home of the parties. There was no appeal. Held that the language of the stipulation was for the purposes of the action only, that because thereof defendant could not assert the invalidity of the judgment because it required him to support a child which was not the natural or adopted child of either of the parties, leaving his right to a revision of the amount to be paid, due to changed conditions, resting in the discretion of the court.
Defendant appealed from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Baldwin, J. revising the amount of alimony required to be paid by him pursuant to a decree of divorce. Affirmed.
Frank W. Booth, for appellant.
Fowler, Carlson, Furber Johnson and C. A. Taney, Jr. for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appealed from an order revising the amount of alimony to be paid by him.
Judgment for divorce was entered March 3, 1924. Pursuant to a stipulation signed by defendant and his counsel the order for judgment provided that defendant should pay $250 per month for the maintenance and support of plaintiff and a minor child. The judgment also gave plaintiff the custody of the child. Defendant is in default in making his payments, and the plaintiff claims that in April, 1928, this default was to the extent of $5,745. Defendant
Page 145
claiming he could not pay made a motion for a modification of the amount. The court reduced the monthly payments to $125 but limited the reduction from June 14, 1928. Defendant being aggrieved by not being relieved of the accumulated delinquent payments now claims that the original judgment is void because the child was not the child of either of the parties to this action.
The adjudication in relation to the child results from the stipulation and is necessarily for the purpose of this action only. It is far short of an adoption. It is without significance except as between the parties and in this action. Having given the written consent to an adjudication from which no appeal was taken, defendant’s only opportunity for relief, rendered appropriate by changed conditions and circumstances, rests in the discretion of the trial court. The record does not show any abuse thereof.
Upon plaintiff’s motion submitted herein she is granted $50 as attorney’s fees, which will be included in the judgment for disbursements. No statutory costs will be allowed.
Affirmed.
Page 146