McNamara v. McAllister
Supreme Court of Iowa
■Appeal from Woodbury District Court. — IIon. W. M. Hutchinson, Judge. Action for alienation of affections. The trial court overruled a demurrer to a part of defendant’s answer and some motions to strike other parts, and, plaintiff electing to stand on the rulings, judgment was entered against him for costs. He appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtDeemer, C. J.
Plaintiff claims that defendant at Sioux City, Iowa, alienated his wife’s affections from him. At the time the cause of action arose, and for many years prior thereto and down to the time of the rulings complained of, both plaintiff and defendant were citizens and residents of the state of Nebraska. The alleged alienation occurred January 8 to 29, 1907, inclusive. Defendant, among other defenses, pleaded the following:(2) This defendant admits that plaintiff and Mary E. McAllister were married in Sioux City, Iowa, and that several children were born to plaintiff and his wife; and defendant…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Embrey v. JemisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Ambler v. WhippleIllinois Supreme Court · 1891
- Snoddy v. CageTexas Supreme Court · 1849
- Hamilton v. McNeillSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
- Miller v. . BrenhamNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Luick v. ArendsNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1911
- Merchants & Planters National Bank of Sherman v. AppleyardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Beneke v. TuckerOregon Supreme Court · 1918
- Page v. PedenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1921
- Blue Pacific Management Corp. v. AndersonHigh Court of American Samoa · 2004
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.