Hartnett v. Hartnett
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtJohnston, J.
The position of the plaintiff is that the court had no jurisdiction to give temporary use of the car to the husband. Consent of course does not confer jurisdiction of a subject matter. Mansfield v. Holton, 74 N. H. 417.
It is also true that the power of the court to grant divorces and legal separations is entirely statutory. Jones v. Jones, 91 N. H. 377. See, also, Baker v. Baker, 90 N. H. 307, and Salta v. Salta, 80 N. H. 218. The statutes make no provision for a temporary allowance to be paid to the husband by the wife for his support. R. L., c. 339, ss. 14, 25. Accordingly, none can be…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Mansfield v. HoltonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1907
- Hatch v. HillsgroveSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1927
- Baker v. BakerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1939
- Salta v. SaltaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1921
- Jones v. JonesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1941
3Cited by2 opinions
- Buckner v. BucknerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1980
- Walker v. WalkerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1979