Legal Opinion

Meek v. Meek

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided December 1, 1920PublishedCited by 7 opinions

On final hearing on pleadings and proofs ex parte.

1Opinion of the Court

Walker, Chancellor.

This is a case of divorce for desertion. The special mas; reports that .he is of opinion that all the material facts chai in the petition are true, and .that a decree for divorce shou1' made in the cause pursuant hr the prayer of the petition. T: I agree, if certain letters -written by the defendant, and were received in evidence, aré sufficiently corroborated, v. Foote, 71 N. J. Eq. 273, 280, the court of error? held that corroboration may be found in defendant’s in Williams v. Williams, 81 N. J. Eq. 17, I held + rule that a divorce will not be granted upon t testimony of…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Smith v. SmithNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1924
  2. Becker v. BeckerNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1933
  3. Coven v. CovenNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1960
  4. Wines v. WinesNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1924
  5. Coe v. CoeNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1924

2 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