Legal Opinion

Wife v. Husband

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided October 23, 1970PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DUFFY, Chancellor:

This is an action for separate maintenance by a wife (plaintiff) against her husband (defendant). Defendant has never been served and jurisdiction is based entirely upon sequestration of his property.

Under the very unusual circumstances shown by the record, I am satisfied that plaintiff has proved her right to separate maintenance and to a lump sum award out of defendant’s estate, 1 if the Court has jurisdiction upon which to proceed. Because of the uncertainty as to this, the Court on its own motion appointed an amicus curiae to argue in opposition to plaintiff.

A

The…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Wightman v. San Francisco Bay Toll-Bridge Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1928
  2. Matheson v. McCormacSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1938
  3. Wightman v. San Francisco Bay Toll-BridgeCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1928
  4. Fritz v. FritzSupreme Court of Delaware · 1962
  5. Mitchell v. Delaware State Tax CommissionerSuperior Court of Delaware · 1945

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Greyhound Corporation v. HeitnerSupreme Court of Delaware · 1976
  2. United States v. SinclairDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1972
  3. Winitz v. KlineCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1971
  4. Wimpfheimer v. GoldsmithCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1972
  5. Commonwealth v. TermineSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API