McMullin v. McMullin
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order denying a new trial. J. M. Seawell, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
BRITT, C.
Plaintiff is the wife of defendant. She prosecutes this action against him under section 137 of the Civil Code, for maintenance without divorce. The parties were married to each other on February 15, 1871, and defendant deserted the plaintiff November 15, 1877; this action was begun January 4, 1894. The court found that defendant’s desertion of plaintiff was willful, and that it continued until April 10, 1895— a time above fifteen months after the commencement of the action—but that on said April 10th defendant offered to provide a home for plaintiff "at any reasonable place of her…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Johnson v. JohnsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1888
- Benkert v. BenkertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Peyre v. PeyreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Almond v. AlmondCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1827
- Hardy v. HardyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Davis v. DavisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Monroe v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Bordeaux v. BordeauxMontana Supreme Court · 1911
- Polk v. PolkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- McMullin v. McMullinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.