Legal Opinion

Hann v. Hann

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided February 28, 1899PublishedCited by 5 opinions

On bill for divorce, answer and proofs.

1Opinion of the Court

Grey, V. C.

This bill is filed for divorce because of alleged adultery on the part of the defendant wife. The defence is a denial of the charge, and an allegation of condonation after the facts on which the charge is based had come to the knowledge of the complainant. - As to the charge of adultery I am satisfied by the proofs that the defendant-is guilty.- There are many facts in the testimony which compel this belief, culminating in the circumstantial statements of the witness, Mrs. Weir, relating what she saw and heard, and what the defendant told her as to the events of the night of April…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Phinizy v. PhinizySupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
  2. Soos v. SoosNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1936
  3. Huffine v. HuffineVan Wert County Court of Common Pleas · 1947
  4. Rushmore v. RushmoreNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1934
  5. Pobst v. PobstMissouri Court of Appeals · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API