Legal Opinion

M. F. v. F.

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided June 30, 1961PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Marvel, Vice Chancellor:

This action seeks separate maintenance for G. F., a minor, the complaint claiming that defendant, the child’s putative father, is liable for the support of such child under the terms of alleged contractual undertakings hereinafter referred to. Plaintiffs alternatively allege that if the contractual provisions pertaining to the child’s support are not specifically enforceable in this Court that defendant in any event has the duty to support his infant child and that such duty is enforceable in this Court. Compare Cohen v. Markel, 35 Del.Ch. 115, 111 A.2d 702. The adult…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. duPont v. duPontSupreme Court of Delaware · 1951
  2. Glanding v. Industrial Trust Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1945
  3. Godwin v. CollinsCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1868
  4. Cohen v. MarkelCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1955
  5. Vale v. Atlantic Coast & Inland Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1953

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Smith v. StowellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1964
  2. State v. CahillSupreme Court of Delaware · 1982
  3. G. L. v. S. D.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1979
  4. Potter v. PotterCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1968
  5. Durand v. SnedekerCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1962

7 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