Mathews v. Mathews
Appellate Court of Illinois
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Barry
Appellee filed his bill for divorce on the ground of wilful desertion, which was denied by appellant. The jury returned a verdict in favor of appellee and upon the overruling of a motion for new trial the court entered a decree of divorce.
In their reply brief counsel for appellant say: “We did not expect the trial judge to allow the motion for new trial, and realized full well that we were merely ‘going through the motions’ when the same was argued, after the judge had permitted such a farce of a trial and so openly manifested his partiality for the cause of the appellee.” They also say that…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Fritz v. FritzIllinois Supreme Court · 1891
- Jones v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1891
- Albee v. AlbeeIllinois Supreme Court · 1892
- Hudson v. HudsonSupreme Court of Florida · 1910
- Gray v. GraySupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Bateman v. BatemanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1949
- Karman v. KarmanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1960
- Pohren v. PohrenAppellate Court of Illinois · 1973
- Hoffman v. HoffmanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1927
- Baumgartner v. BaumgartnerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1958
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.