Clayton v. Clayton

The motion for alimony pendente lite will be denied.

The language of the present chancellor, then a vice-chancellor, in Suydam v. Suydam, 79 N.J. Eq. 144 (at pp. 148 et seq.), is so applicable to the case at bar that I use it in full:

"The rule deducible from these cases seems to be that as well in cases for divorce a mensa et thoro as in those for alimony pure and simple, where the wife has in fact left the husband on account of his alleged derelict conduct, her application for alimony and counsel fee pendente lite will be scrutinized and decided upon the weight of the testimony then presented…