Loveren v. Loveren
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Humboldt County granting alimony pendente lite. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtFitzgerald, J.
This is an appeal from an order made by the court below during the pendency of an action for divorce, requiring the defendant to “pay the plaintiff the sum of seven hundred and ninety-nine dollars and sixty-eight cents for the purpose of defraying the costs and expenses of this action incurred by her up to this date.”
The only question to be determined here involves the power of the court to make such order.
The power of the court to grant alimony pendente lite in an action for divorce is derived solely from that part of section 137, Civil Code, which reads as follows:
“ While an action for…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Beadleston v. . BeadlestonNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- McCarthy v. . McCarthyNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
3Cited by45 opinions
- Donaldson v. DonaldsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1917
- Tremper v. TremperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
- McKay v. McKayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of Florida · 1925
- Dixon v. DixonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.