Wood
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
Appeal from chancery. The appellant filed a bill for a limited divorce and alimony, before the vice chancellor of the first circuit, in January, 1831. The bill was filed in her own name, and not by prochein ami, and alleged cruelty and inhuman treatment on the part of the husband, the respondent in this case.
Read the full summary
Appeal from chancery. The appellant filed a bill for a limited divorce and alimony, before the vice chancellor of the first circuit, in January, 1831. The bill was filed in her own name, and not by prochein ami, and alleged cruelty and inhuman treatment on the part of the husband, the respondent in this case. In March, 1831, the appellant applied to the vice chancellor for an order requiring the respondent to make an advance to her for the prosecution of the suit, and for the maintenance of herself and three children during the pendency of the suit. The vice chancellor made an order directing…
1Opinion of the Court
The following opinions were delivered:
By the Chief Justice.
Two questions are presented: 1. Could the plaintiff file a bill for a divorce, a mensa et thoro, in her own name, without a next friend ? 2. Could the plaintiff be required to give security for costs ? In relation to the first question, two points seemed to be conceded: 1. That before our statute, a married woman could not prosecute her husband except by prochein ami, or next friend; and 2. That since the statute, suits have uniformly been brought in such cases by the married woman alone, without a next friend. At the common law, a…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Phelan v. PhelanSupreme Court of Florida · 1868
- McGee v. McGeeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1851
- Wice v. Commercial InsuranceNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1877
- Hastings v. McKinleyNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1851
- Lamy v. CatronNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.