Barber v. Barber

Background

In 1920 a North Carolina court ordered a husband to pay monthly alimony to his wife; the payments were later reduced. He stopped paying in 1932. In 1940 the North Carolina court entered a money judgment fixing unpaid arrears at $19,707.20 and ordered execution. The wife then sued in Tennessee to enforce that North Carolina judgment, but Tennessee’s highest court refused recognition, saying the judgment lacked finality under North Carolina law because modification might be possible.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court considered whether Tennessee properly denied full faith and credit to the North Carolina money judgment. The Justices examined the North Carolina statute and state decisions and found the law allows modification of orders for future allowances but does not clearly authorize recall or modification of an unconditional money judgment for accrued alimony. An authenticated judgment from a court of general jurisdiction, which on its face awards a specific sum and directs execution, is prima facie valid. Tennessee failed to show persuasive evidence that North Carolina law permitted the judgment here to be modified or recalled, so the refusal to give credit was erroneous.

Real world impact

The decision requires sister states to recognize and enforce an unconditional out-of-state money judgment for accrued alimony when execution is ordered. It protects the practical effect of a fixed arrears judgment across state lines. The Court did not finally decide separate questions about future alimony orders or how a later modification by the original state would be handled.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Jackson concurred, urging a broader rule that judicial proceedings generally deserve credit even if not formally final, and that Tennessee should have enforced the North Carolina judgment immediately.