Legal Opinion

Hopson v. Hopson

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided January 3, 1924PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Bentley, Y. C.

On the final hearing it was represented by the defendant’s counsel that he and his adversary had agreed that he should not apply for alimony or counsel fee prior thereto and that his right to make such application was to be preserved until the final hearing or some subsequent occasion. Why such an *541unusual course was pursued I am at a loss to understand. However, after the hearing and upon the application for tile signing of the decree defendant’s counsel availed himself of the opportunity to present the matter so deferred, and I disposed of everything at that time except his…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Turney v. NooneyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
  2. Iovino v. IovinoNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1959
  3. Gross v. GrossNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
  4. Morrison v. MorrisonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1966
  5. Cole v. ColeNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API