Barber v. Barber
Wisconsin Supreme Court
ERROR to the late District Court for Milwaukee County. This was an action by the plaintiff in error by her nerd; friend.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the late District Court for Milwaukee County. This was an action by the plaintiff in error by her nerd; friend. The declaration set forth that the plaintiff had been divorced a mensa et thoro of the defendant, her husband, by an order or decree made by the vice-chancellor of the fourth circuit of the state of New York, on the complaint of the plaintiff in error, and that by the said order or decree, the defendant was ordered and adjudged to pay to the plaintiff, for her support and maintenance, $3 60 a year, in quarter-yearly payments, as and for her permanent alimony from and after…
1Opinion of the CourtLarrabee, J.
The. demurrer is well taken. After many decisions, which overthrew the doctrine of the common law, it was at last held, after a full argument before the twelve judges, that a feme covert could not sue or be sued as a feme sole, even though she was living apart from her husband, with Ms consent, and upon a separate maintenance secured by deed. Marshall v. Button, 8 Term, 545.
*299It is also a settled doctrine that a divorce a mensa et thoro does not destroy the relation of marriage, but merely suspends for a time some of the obligations arising out of that relation. Lewis v. Lee, 8 Barn. & C. 291.
Th…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Elliott v. RayIndiana Supreme Court · 1826
3Cited by6 opinions
- Halmu v. HalmuWisconsin Supreme Court · 1945
- Kempster v. EvansWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
- Guenther v. JacobsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
- Kunze v. KunzeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
- Kroeger v. KroegerCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1984
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.