Legal Opinion

Smith v. Smith

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 2, 1906PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLoring, J.

[After the foregoing statement of the case.] It is not necessary to decide whether the original decree in the case at bar was a final adjudication on the alimony to be paid. If this order is taken to have been a final adjudication upon the *575question of alimony (using that word to mean payments at stated periods), in case there was a change after the date of the decree in the circumstances of the parties or either of them, which in justice required that additional alimony should be paid, the court could- make the order for further alimony. It is not necessary in the case at bar to consider what…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Knapp v. KnappMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
  2. Southworth v. TreadwellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Coe v. CoeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  2. Whitney v. WhitneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949
  3. Churchill v. ChurchillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
  4. Wilson v. CaswellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
  5. Robbins v. RobbinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1961

8 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