Legal Opinion

Porter v. Porter

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 9, 1927No. 6 Div. 561PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

The right to review on motion for mandamus is supported by the authorities. Ex parte Jackson, 212 Ala. 496, 103- So. 558; Ex parte Tower Mfg. Co., 103 Ala. 415, 15 So. 836.

After tlie divorce which made provision for the infants, the wife and mother sought modification of the decree' so that she might have the children a part of the time, which .was granted. The testimony was heard before the court ore tenus, and the exercise of a sound judicial discretion is challenged. Was the modified decree with due regard to the rights of the respective litigants and in harmony with the principles that in…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Ex parte Tower Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1893
  2. Ex Parte JacksonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  3. Hayes v. HayesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
  4. McDaniel v. YoungbloodSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
  5. Pearce v. PearceSupreme Court of Alabama · 1902

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Sparkman v. SparkmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
  2. Wise v. WatsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1970
  3. Sneed v. SneedSupreme Court of Alabama · 1946
  4. Moss v. IngramSupreme Court of Alabama · 1944
  5. Ex Parte IngallsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1951

5 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