Categories: Oregon Court of Appeals Opinions

LACKEY v. LACKEY, 29 Or. App. 673 (1977)

564 P.2d 293

LACKEY, Respondent, v. LACKEY, Appellant.

No. D-1312, CA 7307Oregon Court of Appeals.Argued May 16, 1977
Affirmed June 1, 1977

Appeal from Circuit Court, Washington County.

Hollie M. Pihl, Judge.

Irvin D. Smith, Burns, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Constance C. Jarvis, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent.

Before Schwab, Chief judge, and Lee and Richardson, Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Costs to respondent.

Page 674

[EDITORS’ NOTE: THIS PAGE IS BLANK.]

Page 675

PER CURIAM.

This appeal arises out of a show-cause hearing in which the father unsuccessfully sought an order of court giving him custody of his three daughters, aged 11, 13 and 17.

We do not reach the merits. Pursuant to stipulation the trial judge interviewed the three girls without a record’s being made of the interview. In Beelman v. Beelman, 227 Or. 556, 361 P.2d 663,363 P.2d 561 (1961), and Schuyler v. Haggart, 224 Or. 530, 356 P.2d 955 (1960), the Supreme Court held that if the appellant in a divorce proceeding does not provide the appellate court with a transcript of a private interview conducted by the judge with a witness, then he has waived his right to trial de novo and the decree below must be affirmed. See also Nichols v. Nichols, 3 Or. App. 103, 471 P.2d 841 (1970), and Green v. Haugen, 1 Or. App. 1, 457 P.2d 655 (1969).