Kane v. Kane
New York Court of Chancery
Bill by the husband against the wife for divorce, a vinculo matrimonii, on the ground of adultery. Application for a decree, on the coming in of the master’s rePorti
1Opinion of the Court
The Vice-Chancellor :
The testimony does not make out the case as stated in the bill. It is altogether different from what is alleged against her, except the general charge of adultery with divers other persons (besides John Stilwell) to the complainants unknown. This sort of general charge is not sufficient to base a decree upon. Time, place and circumstances must be stated, though the names of persons with whom committed are unknown. The testimony shows open and notorious acts of adultery, if the worn an spoken of is really the defendant—no artful attempts at concealment: and yet none of…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Holston v. HolstonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853
- Manning v. HaydenU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · 1879
- Graham v. GrahamNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1892