Beck v. Beck
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 375, Jan. T., 1894, by defendant, from decree of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., March T., 1890, No. 35, on libel for divorce. Libel for divorce. Before Fell, J. Before the jury was'sworn plaintiff’s counsel said: “I desire the privilege of asking the members of this jury if any one of them is conscientiously opposed to the granting of divorces.”
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 375, Jan. T., 1894, by defendant, from decree of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., March T., 1890, No. 35, on libel for divorce. Libel for divorce. Before Fell, J. Before the jury was'sworn plaintiff’s counsel said: “I desire the privilege of asking the members of this jury if any one of them is conscientiously opposed to the granting of divorces.” Objected to; objection overruled; exception noted for defend-, ant. [1] The question was put to the jury and no challenges were made. At the trial it appeared that plaintiff and defendant were married on June 29, 1858. In June, 1882, they moved…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
An examination of this somewhat voluminous record has not-convinced us that either of the specifications of error should be sustained. The testimony bearing on the questions of fact, involved in the issue, was sufficient to justify the learned trial judge in submitting the case to the jury. There was therefore-no error in refusing to charge as requested in appellant’s tenth point, that under all the evidence the verdict must be in her favor. Nor do we think that upon the whole case there was any error in entering the decree complained of in the last specification.
Decree affirmed…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Roby v. RobyIdaho Supreme Court · 1904
- Buys v. BuysSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Greer v. GreerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
- Kowalchick v. KowalchickSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Monahan v. AumanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.