Legal Opinion

Vermilye v. Vermilye

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 3, 1884PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Action for divorce, brought in the district court for Bamsey county, ■the plaintiff asking also the sole custody of the infant child of the parties. The answer, among other things, charges plaintiff with various acts of misconduct in business transactions, and with making false charges of adultery against defendant, for the purpose of extorting money and property from the person falsely charged to be her paramour.

Read the full summary

Action for divorce, brought in the district court for Bamsey county, ■the plaintiff asking also the sole custody of the infant child of the parties. The answer, among other things, charges plaintiff with various acts of misconduct in business transactions, and with making false charges of adultery against defendant, for the purpose of extorting money and property from the person falsely charged to be her paramour. On plaintiff’s motion, an order striking out these allegations was made by Brill, J., and the defendant appealed. The cause being on the calendar at April term, 1884, the plaintiff…

1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.

In an action for divorce, where one of the issues to he determined is, who shall have custody of the minor children, it *500is proper to insert in the pleadings allegations of fact pertinent tn that issue; as, for example, the unfitness of the other party. But in this, as in every other case, the pleading should contain a statement only of issuable facts, and not of mere evidence. The facts required by the Code to be stated are issuable facts, essential to the cause of action or defence, and not those which merely go to establish such essential facts. This is now the universal rule, whether the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Knowles v. GeeNew York Supreme Court · 1850
  2. Freeman v. CurranSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1854

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Stimson v. StimsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Flood v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
  3. Kokesh v. City of HopkinsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  4. Lowe v. NixonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  5. LaDuke v. E. W. Wylie Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1950

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

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

Powered by the Exa API