Legal Opinion

Pickett v. Pickett

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided October 28, 1880PublishedCited by 29 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Eedwood county, Cox, J., presiding. The defendant did not answer the complaint, nor make any appearance in the district court or in this court.

1Opinion of the CourtGilfillan, C. J.

Action by a wife for divorce, on the ground of adultery by the husband. As to the fact of adultery, the court below found that, after the marriage, the defendant had carnal intercourse with an unmarried woman, but decided that such carnal intercourse was not adultery within the meaning of the statute regulating divorce, holding that statute to use the word “adultery” in the restricted' sense in which it is used in the statute making adultery a criminal offence, and not in the more enlarged sense in wdiich it is commonly used.

In some of the states, our own included, it is held that to…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Vanderburgh v. BassettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1860

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Kennedy v. WalcuttOhio Supreme Court · 1928
  2. In Re Estate of OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
  3. State v. HastySupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
  4. In re the Probate of the Will of LaymanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
  5. In Re Estate of ForsytheSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API