Hassaurek v. Markbreit
Ohio Supreme Court
Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton 'County. Plaintiff brought' her action in the court of common pleas to recover from the defendant $600, the sum of six monthly installments which were admitted to be unpaid, and which she claimed to be due her on the following state of facts.: In 1881, the late Frederick Iiassaurek and the plaintiff were husband and wife, and the parents of two children.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton 'County. Plaintiff brought' her action in the court of common pleas to recover from the defendant $600, the sum of six monthly installments which were admitted to be unpaid, and which she claimed to be due her on the following state of facts.: In 1881, the late Frederick Iiassaurek and the plaintiff were husband and wife, and the parents of two children. In that year he brought suit for the dissolution of the marriage relations upon the sole ground of the wife’s willful absence for more than three years. She was personally served in. Hamilton county, but…
1Opinion of the Court
There was, upon the evidence, -no question of fact for the consideration. of the jury. The general question is whether, upon the conceded facts, the judgment should be for the plaintiff, as was held in the court of common pleas, or for the defendant, as was held in the circuit court. The decree of divorce upon which the plaintiffs action is founded is easily recognized as the termination of marital relations between a pair with whom respect had survived devotedness. Its terms show that the natural relations between the mother and -her children were to- continue so far as was compatible with a…
2Cited by35 opinions
- Davis v. DavisMahoning County Court of Common Pleas · 1970
- Desjardins v. DesjardinsDistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1961
- Vaught v. VaughtOhio Court of Appeals · 1981
- Snouffer v. SnoufferOhio Supreme Court · 1937
- Desjardins v. DesjardinsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1962
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.