Blott v. Rider
New York Supreme Court
Motion by defendant to set aside the judgment declaring void the marriage contract between the parties, entered esa parte by the plaintiff on the referee’s report, without application to the court, on the ground of irregularity.
1Opinion of the CourtLamont, J.
No judgment for a divorce, whether after the trial of an issue, or otherwise, can be entered except upon the special direction of the court {Rule 92). A judgment declaring void the marriage contract by a sentence of nullity operates by judicial act to separate married persons, and is a divorce, as much so, as a judgment dissolving it. The rule *91embraces all divorce causes, and is coextensive with the statutes upon the subject. The suggestion that this rule is null and void, as being contrary to the provisions of the Code, cannot be adopted. Actions for divorce, for special reasons and by force…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- White v. WhiteNew York Supreme Court · 1849
- Cropsey v. McKinneyNew York Supreme Court · 1859
- Peugnet v. PhelpsNew York Supreme Court · 1867
- Public Administrator v. WattsNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
- Dodge v. DodgeNew York Court of Chancery · 1839
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Querze v. QuerzeNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
- Finn v. FinnNew York Supreme Court · 1878
- Goldie v. GoldieNew York Supreme Court · 1902
- Dailey v. DaileyNew York Supreme Court · 1894
- Harding v. HardingThe Superior Court of New York City · 1877