Legal Opinion

Taylor v. Taylor

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided December 6, 1920No. Divorce, No. 88PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBoyce, J.

The court is constrained to deny the motion to dismiss the petition on the ground of mistake in the initial “T.” in the Christian name of the defendant (Carr v. Buchanan, 5 Boyce, 254, 92 Atl. 875), and also to deny the motion to amend (Wagner v. Wagner, 3 Penn. 303, 51 Atl. 603; Sindowski v. Sindowski, 2 Boyce, 547, 84 Atl. 805), and will proceed to hear the case on its merits. If the evidence establishes the fact that the correct initial in the Christian name of the defendant is “I”, and not “T”, and that she was personally served with the summons issued in this cause, and if after hearing…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Sindowski v. SindowskiSuperior Court of Delaware · 1911
  2. Carr v. BuchananSuperior Court of Delaware · 1914

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Southern Maryland Trust Co. v. HenrySuperior Court of Delaware · 1931
  2. Syfrit v. GauseSuperior Court of Delaware · 1920
  3. Woodward v. DanielsSuperior Court of Delaware · 1925
  4. Calhoun v. F. G. Elliott Hdw. Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API