Legal Opinion

Thomsen v. Thomsen

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 25, 1929PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

We are satisfied that the defendant’s charge of desertion is well established; the plaintiff’s accusation of adultery is apparently supported by substantial evidence. It may be well, therefore, at this point to determine what results follow if we should conclude that both charges are true.

In Carmichael v. Carmichael, 106 Or. 198 (211 Pac. 916), this court said: “The doctrine of recrimination is an application of the wholesome maxim in equity that he who comes into equity must come with clean hands.” And in Hawley v. Hawley, 101 Or. 649 (199 Pac. 589), we said: “Divorce is a remedy for the…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. State v. MagersOregon Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Hengen v. HengenOregon Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Carmichael v. CarmichaelOregon Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Hawley v. HawleyOregon Supreme Court · 1921
  5. O'Brien v. O'BrienOregon Supreme Court · 1899

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Courson v. CoursonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
  2. Edwards v. EdwardsOregon Supreme Court · 1951
  3. Waldow v. WaldowOregon Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Goodman v. GoodmanOregon Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Lafollett v. LafollettOregon Supreme Court · 1932

10 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