Stark v. Stark
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Pike Circuit Court. — Hon. David H. Fby> Judge. Respondent maintains that in a divorce proceeding the awarding of temporary alimony and attorney’s fees and suit money to the wife, pending the trial, is a matter from necessity and by common law and statute to be left to the sound discretion of the trial court, and in the absence of apparent and gross abuse of that discretion that court’s judgment will not be disturbed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pike Circuit Court. — Hon. David H. Fby> Judge. Respondent maintains that in a divorce proceeding the awarding of temporary alimony and attorney’s fees and suit money to the wife, pending the trial, is a matter from necessity and by common law and statute to be left to the sound discretion of the trial court, and in the absence of apparent and gross abuse of that discretion that court’s judgment will not be disturbed. R. S. 1889, sec. 2926; State ex rel. v. Seddon, 93 Mo. 520, 6 S. W. 342; Adams v. Adams, 49 Mo. App. 592; Long v. Long, 78 Mo. App. 32. Statement. — This appeal is…
1Opinion of the CourtNortoni, J.
(after stating the facts). — The general rule in divorce cases is that the wife, whether plaintiff or defendant, is entitled to a reasonable allowance against the husband for the purpose of either prosecuting or defending the suit. The old doctrine in this behalf proceeded upon the theory that the wife was financially helpless inasmuch as whatever property she possessed at the date of her marriage or which came to her during coverture became the property of her husband, and as a correlative of this rule, the husband owed to her the obligation of support and maintenance and also a defense of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Collins v. . CollinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Waters v. WatersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
- Adams v. AdamsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1892
- Penningroth v. PenningrothMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
- Porter v. PorterMississippi Supreme Court · 1866
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1942
- Pedersen v. PedersenCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Rutledge v. RutledgeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- Poor v. PoorMissouri Court of Appeals · 1942
- Bowzer v. BowzerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1941
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.