Legal Opinion

Doe v. Doe

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided March 30, 1944No. File 15406Published

1Opinion of the CourtMellitz, J.

The plaintiff seeks a divorce on the ground of adultery. The evidence presented leaves little doubt that an adulterous relationship existed between the defendant and one William Alexander during the year 1941. The plain-

Note: For reporting purposes, the true names of the parties involved have been omitted with authority of the court. tiff became aware of the situation in December, 1941, and immediately thereafter the plaintiff and defendant separated and lived apart.

The plaintiff himself had innocently contributed to the defendant’s lapses from the marital code, since it was through him that…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Purcell v. PurcellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
  2. Bagdan v. BagdanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
  3. Leech v. LeechNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1913
  4. Bravo v. BravoNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1921
  5. McGovern v. McGovernNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1932

1 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