Legal Opinion

Burrow v. Burrow

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1880PublishedCited by 1 opinion

PROM MACON. Appeal from the Chancery Court at Lafayette, ~W. G. Crowley, Ch.

1Opinion of the CourtCooper, J.

'The complainant in this divorce case has moved *500for an allowance for her support pendente lite, and to defray the expenses of the suit.

The courts of this State do make an allowance for these purposes in all proper cases. It has been held not to be a proper case where the wife has adequate means of her own for her support, and to defray the expenses of the suit. So, when her suit is without any just or reasonable foundation: Thompson v. Thompson, 3 Head, 527. “It would be unreasonable,” says Chancellor Walworth, “to compel the defendant to furnish the means of carrying on a suit which the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Wood v. WoodNew York Court of Chancery · 1831

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Haynes v. HaynesTennessee Supreme Court · 1951

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

Powered by the Exa API