Morton v. Morton
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. I. The decree was illegal. There is no power expressed in onr statute of divorce and alimony by which the Circuit Court is authorized to allow alimony pendente lite, when the wife is defendant. (R. C. 1855, p. 664, § 8.) Sec. 11 cannot affect the question, as it refers to alimony in cases of abandonment where there is no action pending.
Read the full summary
Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. I. The decree was illegal. There is no power expressed in onr statute of divorce and alimony by which the Circuit Court is authorized to allow alimony pendente lite, when the wife is defendant. (R. C. 1855, p. 664, § 8.) Sec. 11 cannot affect the question, as it refers to alimony in cases of abandonment where there is no action pending. (Doyle v. Doyle, 26 Mo. 543.) Nor can any such power be implied from the language used or the other powers granted, even though it should be admitted that alimony pendente lite, as a general proposition, was incident to the…
1Opinion of the CourtDryden, Judge
This was a suit for divorce, by the husband against the wife, in which the cause alleged was adultery. The defendant answered, traversing the allegations of the petition touching the cause for the divorce. After coming in of the answer, *617the court, at the instance of the defendant, ordered the plaintiff to pay to her for the temporary support and maintenance of herself and two children the sum of $41.65 per month, payable monthly, until the further order of the court, and also required him by a day fixed to furnish and pay the further sum of $100 to enable the defendant to retain counsel for…
2Cited by6 opinions
- State ex rel. Dawson v. St. Louis Court of AppealsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1889
- Waters v. WatersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
- Chapman v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1917
- Long v. LongMissouri Court of Appeals · 1899
- Hedges v. NorrisNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1880
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.