Riley v. Riley

BARNARD, P. J.

This is another chapter in a long controversy, other parts of which have reached this court.

(Riley

v.

Superior Court,

111 Cal.App.2d 365 [244 P.2d 474];

Estate of Riley,

115 Cal.App.2d 495 [252 P.2d 395];

Riley

v.

Riley,

118 Cal.App.2d 11 [256 P.2d 1056].)

The plaintiff is the former wife of Chester J. Riley. The couple had three sons. In 1941, they executed a property settlement agreement providing, in part, as follows:

“Second Party agrees that he will contribute a reasonable sum for the support and maintenance of the children of the parties hereto during their separation and Second Party further agrees that he will from time to time direct the Trustee to pay unto First Party reasonable sums of money for the support, care, maintenance and education of the children of the parties hereto. First Party agrees that she will contribute reasonable sums for the support and maintenance and education of the children of the parties hereto. It is understood that, in arriving at the sums to be contributed by either of the parties hereto, the ability of the parties hereto and the needs of said children shall be taken into consideration.”

Mrs. Riley later secured a divorce, the decree not mentioning the property settlement agreement or making any order for the support of the children. Chester J. Riley died in 1951, leaving $1,000 to each of said sons and the remainder of his estate to his sister, Portia A. Riley. The plaintiff filed a claim in the estate, based on the agreement above quoted,

[305]

for the amounts claimed to be due up to the date of Riley’s death, and for a reasonable contribution for the support of the children from that time until they reach the age of 21 years. This claim was rejected by the executrix and Mrs. Riley brought this action.