Stanley v. State
Tennessee Supreme Court
This cause was brought in the county court of Knox county in the usual manner, on the application of Mary Ault against John L. Stanley, charging him with being the father of her illegitimate child. The affidavit and warrant did not show that the child was horn in Knox county, and a motion was made in the county court to amend them so as to show that fact, which was allowed hv the court.
Read the full summary
This cause was brought in the county court of Knox county in the usual manner, on the application of Mary Ault against John L. Stanley, charging him with being the father of her illegitimate child. The affidavit and warrant did not show that the child was horn in Knox county, and a motion was made in the county court to amend them so as to show that fact, which was allowed hv the court. On application an issue was made up to try the fact of the paternity of the child ; and at the request of Stanley a jury was accordingly summoned, who tried the same and found the defendant to be the father.…
1Opinion of the Court
McKinney, J.,
delivering orally the opinion of the court,
Held — 1st. That the amendment of the affidavit and warrant hy the county court was not erroneous. It is not indispensable that the place of birth should be set forth in the warrant It is a matter of evidence, and it is sufficient if it appear in the order of the court. (1)
2. The “quorum” court of the county court was competent to try the question of paternity, the legislature having conferred that power on it.
3. The circuit judge did not err in refusing a jury to try the question of paternity. The legislature has expressly given the…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Potts v. AmisWashington Supreme Court · 1963
- Vannoy v. Pacific Power & Light Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1962
- Thompson v. TuggleLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1986
- Bowden v. CrowfordTexas Supreme Court · 1910
- Home Fire Insurance v. WoodNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.