Legal Opinion

Slocum v. Slocum

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 8, 1908PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Appeal’ from Benton Chancery Court; T. Haden Humphreys, Chancellor; On the mere unverified allegations, and unsupported by proof making out a prima facie case, the court was unauthorized to pay such large sums of money. 30 Ark. 76; 63 Id. 128; 28 'Id. 94; 37 S. W. 1022. It is only necessary to make out a prima facie case by affirmative proof. Allowances are made without consideration of the merits if the suit is in good faith. 2 Am. & Eng. Enc. of L. too; 1 Enc.

Read the full summary

Appeal’ from Benton Chancery Court; T. Haden Humphreys, Chancellor; On the mere unverified allegations, and unsupported by proof making out a prima facie case, the court was unauthorized to pay such large sums of money. 30 Ark. 76; 63 Id. 128; 28 'Id. 94; 37 S. W. 1022. It is only necessary to make out a prima facie case by affirmative proof. Allowances are made without consideration of the merits if the suit is in good faith. 2 Am. & Eng. Enc. of L. too; 1 Enc. PI. & Pr. 421-2; 2 Id. 103; 1 Edw. Ch. 62; Clarke, Ch. 151; Keezer, Mar. & Div. 152; 3 Edw. Ch. 387; 8 Id. 194; 44 Ark. 46.

1Opinion of the CourtHill, C. J.

On the 20th of July, 1907, Mrs. Slocum filed suit for divorce against her husband, Dr. Slocum. The allegations of her complaint, if proved, would have entitled her to a divorce under the statutory cause of offering, such indignities to the person as to render her condition in life intolerable.

To this complaint Dr. Slocum filed an answer, admitting marriage and denying all the material allegations constituting a cause of divorce. He also filed a cross-bill, in which he alleged facts which, if proved, would have entitled him to divorce under the same clause of the statute. To this cross-bill…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Haley v. HaleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
  2. Glenn v. GlennSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
  3. Countz v. CountzSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1875
  4. Fountain v. FountainSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
  5. Plant v. PlantSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1896

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Millar v. MillarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
  2. Lenser v. McGowanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004
  3. Wood v. WoodSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
  4. Pettigrew v. PettigrewSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
  5. Fine v. FineSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1946

8 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