Legal Opinion

Monk v. Monk

The Superior Court of New York City

Decided July 15, 1867PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Motion by the plaintiff for alimony, and an allowance for expenses, in an action for a divorce.

1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.

So far as this motion is based on the charge of adultery, it cannot be granted. The charges are all made on information and belief, and the defendant positively denies them. ISTo affidavits are tendered in support of them. The case then falls directly within the principle of Osgood v. Osgood, (2 Paige, 621.) The affidavit of the plaintiff respecting general admissions of the defendant to her, does not help her case. The plaintiff must sustain, her action upon the specific charges contained in the complaint. The admission in question, even supposing it does not contravene the rule prohibiting…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Osgood v. OsgoodNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
  2. Hollerman v. HollermanNew York Supreme Court · 1847

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Moriarty v. MoriartyThe Superior Court of New York City · 1890

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API