Cast v. Cast
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial. District. The facts appear in the Opinion of the Court. 1. The first, fourth and eighth sections of the Territorial Statute in relation to divorces are void and invalid, for the reason that they attempt to confer jurisdiction on the Probate Courts in applications for divorce. These sections of the Statute are in conflict with the Organic Act, and necessarily without force.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial. District. The facts appear in the Opinion of the Court. 1. The first, fourth and eighth sections of the Territorial Statute in relation to divorces are void and invalid, for the reason that they attempt to confer jurisdiction on the Probate Courts in applications for divorce. These sections of the Statute are in conflict with the Organic Act, and necessarily without force. (Moore v. Konsbly, Idaho R., 55-62; Landon v. Bartley, Idaho R., 223; Locknane v. Martin, Kansas R., 67; Sec. 9, Organic Act. 2. The Territorial Legislature< having…
1Opinion of the CourtBoreman, J.
This is a suit for divorce from the bonds of matrimony and for alimony, which was instituted by the Respondent against her husband, in the Third District Court of the Territory, wherein a decree for divorce and alimony was entered, and thereupon the Defendant appealed to this c jurt.
The only question raised and involved is as to the jurisdiction of the District Court to hear and determine *114the case..' The objection to its taking cognizance thereof is based solely upon the ground that divorce is “neither the subject of common law nor equity jurisdiction” but is a “ special proceeding and purely…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- The United States v. Hudson and GoodwinSupreme Court of the United States · 1812
- Parsons v. Bedford, Breedlove, & RobesonSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
- Perky v. PerryNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- Charlotte A. Parish v. Harvey W. Ellis and WifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1842
3Cited by9 opinions
- In re ChristiansenUtah Supreme Court · 1898
- State ex rel. Stack v. GrimmSupreme Court of Missouri · 1912
- People ex rel. Yearian v. SpiersUtah Supreme Court · 1886
- Thompson v. ThompsonNevada Supreme Court · 1926
- Whitmore v. HardinUtah Supreme Court · 1881
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.