Uhl v. Uhl
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Sixth Judicial District, County of Sacramento. The plaintiff alleged in her complaint that on the 5th day of December, 1860, she married the defendant, and that on the 6th day of February, 1848, she had married Joseph Marzeaux, and that the first marriage had never been annulled, and that Marzeaux was still alive.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Sixth Judicial District, County of Sacramento. The plaintiff alleged in her complaint that on the 5th day of December, 1860, she married the defendant, and that on the 6th day of February, 1848, she had married Joseph Marzeaux, and that the first marriage had never been annulled, and that Marzeaux was still alive. For another cause of action she averred, that she owned separate property, both real and personal, in Sacramento, and that the defendant falsely claimed an interest in it. She asked that the second marriage be annulled, and that her title to the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court :
The demurrer to the complaint should have been sustained, on the ground that several causes of action were improperly united. The action is to annul the marriage between plaintiff and defendant, on the ground that when it was solemnized the plaintiff was already a married woman, her first husband being still alive. If the plaintiff, as the complaint avers, possessed a separate estate, consisting of real and personal property, there were no property rights founded upon or growing out of the illegal marriage with which the Court could deal in annulling the marriage. If the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Peck v. PeckMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
- Letts v. LettsMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Reed v. ReedNebraska Supreme Court · 1902
- Reed v. ReedNebraska Supreme Court · 1904
- Przeklas v. PrzeklasMichigan Supreme Court · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.