MEXICO DIVORCE LEAVES TWO MANY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85-00375R000200120002-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 6, 2001
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: August 26, 1971
• Content Type: NSPR

Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP85-003758000200120002-6
OGC Has Reviewed
By BETTY JONES
Betty P. L a t s a w (or
Jones), law clerk to D.C. Fed-
eral District Judge Burnita
Matthews, got a Mexican di-
vorce from Joseph Latshaw of
Arlington last year and re-
m a r r i e d. The divorce was
ruled invalid yesterday by an
Arlington judge.
Mrs. Latshaw-Jones flew to
Mexico, "stayed there a mat-
ter of hours" to gt the divorce
and shortly thereafter married
her ex-husband's "best
friend," according to lawyer
James Miller, who represent-
ed Mr. Latshaw.
AriingtonCircuit Judge
Charles Russell said such di-
vorce considered "abso-
lotel.v void" in Virginia.
He said the American ex-
perience with quickie divorces
in Mexico or elsewhere has
"gradually :shaken down to the
cardinal principle" that stand-
ards regarding marriage and
divorce are local matters to
be handled by state legisla-,
tures.
"We have yet to become
such a nation of migrants that
the power to determine (mar-
riage laws) should be taken
away from state legislatures,"
the judge said.
Mrs. Latshaw-Jones' present
address, according to court re-
cords, is 3122 Wynford Drive,
Fairfax.
Mr. Latshaw, who lives at
5618 N. Ninth-st, Arlington,
challenged the legality of the
divorce and asked to have the
Latshaw marriage declared
still in effect in answer to
Mrs. Latshaw-Jones' c o u r t
suit for a property settlement.
Her lawyer , Harry Size-
more, charged Mr. Latshaw
did this to protect his $46,000
annual income from Army re-
tirement pay, a family corpo-
ration and ?a Missouri farm.
After Judge Russell ruled,
Mr. Miller said that Mr. Lat-
shaw will file a divorce suit
here against his wife.
The matter was brought be-
for Judge Russell on Mrs. Lat-
shaw-Jones' appeal of a di-
vorce commissioner's ruling
that the Mexican divorce was
invalid. Court officials said it
was the second time recently
in Arlington that a Mexican
divorce has been challenged
and ruled invalid. D.C. courts.
have also ruled the quickie di-
vorces invalid upon challenge.
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP85-00375R000200120002-6
 Approved For Rise 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP85-00375RQ200120002-6
1. What was the exact date and location of the divorce?
2. What were the grounds cited in the divorce decree or
other legal documents?
4. Where did he physically reside immediately prior to
the divorce and for how long?
5. Did both he and his wife appear in court in Mexico,
did one party appear and the other appear by counsel,
did both appear by counsel, or did one appear and the
other not appear even by counsel? If the last mentioned
situation, did the party not appearing know of the divorce
and how? If the absent spouse appeared by counsel can
he or she claim duress in signing the power of attorney?
Was the power of attorney notarized?
6. Did the couple have children?
7. Were provisions made for either alimony or support in
the decree? If so, was there incorporated by reference
into the divorce decree a separate agreement which was
signed by both parties and attested to in the United States?
Was such a separate agreement negotiated by the parties
while represented by attorneys?
8. Has any U. S. court made reference to the Mexican
divorce in any judgment or decree, e. g. , an attempt to
set aside the divorce, a declaratory judgment concerning
validity of the divorce, a collateral issue referencing the
divorce such as a custody or support suit?
9. Has the other party remarried? Are there children by
that marriage?
10. Is the other party living?
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP85-00375R000200120002-6
 _?_3 I P - a7MR BOTTOM 002-6
IT1 TC'U 4QQI1'i F.il 1 1 C'U I
OFFICIAL ROUTING SLIP
DATE INITIALS
NAME AND ADDRESS
DD/Pers-SP
ACTION DIRECT REPLY PREPARE REPLY
APPROVAL DISPATCH RECOMMEN ION
COMMENT FILE" RETURN
CONCU ENCE- INFORMATIO SIGNA UR
Attachment 1 is a paragraph for inclusion
in your memorandum to ExDir.
Attachment 2 is a rephrasing of the
questions to be asked in future cases.
Let me know if you have any questions.
FOLD HERE TO RETURN TO SENDER
Deputy General Counsel
FORM NO. 237 Use previous editions
1-67 GJ
?T TIN TL
 4~~~0~0200I
? UNCLASSIFIED
ONFIDENTIAL SECRET
OFFICIAL ROUTING
SLIP
TO
NAME AND ADDRESS
DATE
INITIALS
I
C /Director of Personnel
{r~r~~ i.~ily
3
/4 -A c
4 MAX 197
4
s 7
MQY 1970
5
"
_ Y -R s S
6
ACTION
DIRECT REPLY
PREPARE REPLY
APPROVAL
DISPATCH
RECOMMENDATION
COMMENT
FILE
RETURN
CONCURRENCE
X
INFORMATION
SIGNATURE
Remarks :
L41 G 4A1J A #,%Q
cJ W L
FOLD HERE TO RETURN TO SENDER
FROM: NAME. ADDRESS AND PHONE NO. DATE
Office of General Counsel
2Q01109103
i
AS D CONFIDENTIAL SECRET
FORM NO.
237 Use previous editions (40)
1-67 I
002-6