Lawrence v. Lawrence
New York Court of Chancery
This was a bill for a separation, filed by the wife against her husband. On" a former day, upon the application of the wife, the court ordered the husband to advance to her next friend $50, towards the expenses of the suit, to be refunded, as the court should direct, if, upon the hearing, it should appear the suit was brought without any justifiable cause.
Read the full summary
This was a bill for a separation, filed by the wife against her husband. On" a former day, upon the application of the wife, the court ordered the husband to advance to her next friend $50, towards the expenses of the suit, to be refunded, as the court should direct, if, upon the hearing, it should appear the suit was brought without any justifiable cause. It was also referred to a master to enquire and report what sum, if any, was necessary to be paid by the defendant for the support of his wife pending the litigation; the master, in ascertaining the sum, to take into consideration the…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The application to remove the next friend of the complainant must be denied, with costs. The defendant, undoubtedly, has a right to require that the next *269friend of the wife who prosecutes a suit for a separation shall be a responsible person. If the next friend is insolvent, or irresponsible, the husband may apply to stay all proceedings in the cause until security for costs is given, or until a responsible person is substituted. (Pennington v. Alvin, 1 Sim. & Stu. Rep. 264.) And if such security is not given, or a new prochein amy substituted within a reasonable time, the bill…
2Cited by17 opinions
- McGee v. McGeeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1851
- Forrest v. ForrestThe Superior Court of New York City · 1856
- Foote v. FooteIllinois Supreme Court · 1859
- Conklin v. ConklinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
- Bartlett v. BartlettNew York Court of Chancery · 1841
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.