Legal Opinion

Blankenship v. Blankenship

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided September 13, 1929No. 2838PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

The petition for a rehearing is very extensive, and a large part of it is devoted to the presentation of the point that the judgments of the California courts cannot be considered as conclusive or any evidence of the recriminatory defense on the part of the wife, which we held barred the respondent from a decree of divorce. The point is argued with great earnestness and singular dexterity; but we are unable to consider it as a ground for a rehearing, for the reason that it was not advanced in the brief of counsel for respondent on the original hearing or in their oral argument. It is…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Nelson v. SmithNevada Supreme Court · 1918
  2. In re the Estate of ForneyNevada Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Gordon v. HillmanWashington Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Gamble v. HanchettNevada Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Kirman v. JohnsonNevada Supreme Court · 1908

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Johnson v. International of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local Union No. 971Nevada Supreme Court · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API