ALEXANDER v. ALEXANDER
2015 OK 52
Okla.2015Background
- Rhonda and Joseph Alexander filed for divorce based on incompatibility; Joseph admitted incompatibility in his answer.
- Rhonda, terminally ill with stage-four lung cancer, moved to have the divorce granted quickly so she could leave her share to her daughters.
- On August 20, 2013 the trial court orally pronounced the parties divorced, filed a handwritten Court Minute signed by the judge and attorneys, and ordered mediation and submission of a journal entry; no journal entry was ever filed.
- Rhonda died on October 10, 2013 before property division was finalized; Joseph then moved to dismiss, arguing the court lost jurisdiction upon her death.
- The trial court granted dismissal; the Court of Civil Appeals affirmed. The Oklahoma Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed, holding the divorce was effective when pronounced and the court retained jurisdiction to divide property.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Appellants: successors of Rhonda) | Defendant's Argument (Joseph) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a divorce is effective when orally pronounced absent a filed journal entry | The oral pronouncement was effective under 12 O.S. § 696.2(E); divorce should be enforceable when pronounced | Divorce was not final until a written/journal entry was filed; death of a party before filing abates jurisdiction | Court held divorce effective when pronounced; filing affects appealability but not enforceability |
| Whether the trial court lost jurisdiction to divide property after a party's death before journal entry | Succession can pursue property division because the marital status was already ended by pronouncement | Death abated the action and deprived court of jurisdiction to enter final decree | Court held death did not divest jurisdiction over property division once divorce was effectively pronounced |
| Whether an unfiled court minute constitutes a final, appealable judgment | Minute pronouncement makes judgment enforceable for divorce under § 696.2(E) despite minute title | Court minute (labeled "Court Minute") cannot be a judgment under § 696.2(D) and Corbit | Court distinguished enforceability (effective when pronounced) from appealability (requires filing); overruled Whitmire and applied § 696.2(E) and Pellow |
| Whether Whitmire controls to require dismissal when no journal entry filed before death | Appellants argued Whitmire was wrongly decided and inconsistent with statutes allowing pronouncement to be effective | Joseph relied on Whitmire to support dismissal for lack of jurisdiction | Court overruled Whitmire and held it was wrongly decided; reversed dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- Corbit v. Williams, 897 P.2d 1129 (Okla. 1995) (court minutes labeled as such ordinarily do not constitute a final, appealable judgment)
- Pellow v. Pellow, 714 P.2d 593 (Okla. 1985) (a divorce judgment is valid when pronounced; failure to journalize does not render it void)
- Whitmire v. Whitmire, 78 P.3d 556 (Okla. Civ. App. 2003) (Court of Civil Appeals held death before journal entry deprived court of jurisdiction; overruled by this opinion)
- Chastain v. Posey, 665 P.2d 1179 (Okla. 1983) (supporting precedent that effective pronouncement can terminate marriage even if journalization occurs later)
- Barnett v. Barnett, 917 P.2d 473 (Okla. 1996) (recognizes divorce and property division may be bifurcated and handled separately)