Hardy v. Hardy

WARNE, J. pro tem.

*

On February 8,1957, the trial court entered a decree against defendants John C. Hardy, the beneficiary, and Eugene D. Hardy, as the trustee under the will of

[318]

Mary C. Hardy, who died in 1952, leaving a testamentary spendthrift trust composed of movables and land in Illinois. The decree provided, among other things, that said trustee pay out of the income, or corpus, if necessary, of the trust, a certain specific sum as alimony to the plaintiff for the support of herself and the minor child of plaintiff and defendant John 0. Hardy, and for counsel fees and costs which plaintiff incurred in the divorce proceedings.

An appeal from said decree, and an appeal from an order for counsel fees were taken by defendants. Except for those portions of the decree which purported to impose a lien on trust property located in Illinois, the decree and said order were affirmed by this court.

(Hardy

v.

Hardy,

164 Cal.App.2d 77 [330 P.2d 278], and

Hardy

v.

Hardy,

164 Cal.App.2d 82 [330 P.2d 281].)

On motion of the plaintiff said decree was modified by eliminating alimony payments from and after February 2, 1958 (plaintiff having remarried on said date), and fixing payments to be made to the plaintiff for the support of the minor child.

Nothing having been paid by either defendant on the decrees and/or orders made by the trial court, plaintiff sought further relief and as the result thereof the trial court made its ‘ ‘ Orders to Insure Compliance with Decrees,” which modified its decrees, in various ways not material here, and again ordered Eugene, as trustee, to pay the amount owed to Marilyn by John from the money on hand in the trust and in the event the trust did not have sufficient cash or means on hand for Eugene to pay said sums forthwith, he, Eugene, was ordered to execute and deliver to the Long Beach branch of the Security-First National Bank of Los Angeles, within 10 days of the service of a copy of the order, a written order on the Farmers and Mechanics Bank in Galesburg, Illinois, directing that bank to forward to said Los Angeles bank all movables, ehoses in action, leases, and in particular, seven promissory notes representing money due on the sale of a partnership interest owned by John’s mother before her death. At the time oE making of the above orders both defendants were residents of the State of California, and due service of a certified copy of said “Orders to Insure Compliance with Decrees” was made on both defendants in this state. Defendants have appealed from said orders and decree.