Perry v. Perry
New York Court of Chancery
This cause came before the court upon exceptions to a master’s report, allowing forty-three exceptions to the complainant’s bill, for impertinence.
Read the full summary
This cause came before the court upon exceptions to a master’s report, allowing forty-three exceptions to the complainant’s bill, for impertinence. The bill was filed by the husband, •against his wife, for a separation from bed and board, under the provisions of the twelfth section of the act of the 10th of April, 1824. (Laws of 1824, ch. 20, p. 249.) The bill, after stating the marriage of the complainant with the defendant, and the situation of his family at that time, as well as at the commencement of this suit, proceeded to state the various acts of violence and misconduct of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
If the exceptions in this case were good in substance, they are clearly defective in form. For, as they are allowed by the master, they leave some parts of the bill not embraced in the exceptions, perfectly senseless. Besides, they are improper in form in dividing up the charges in the bill, by several exceptions to different parts of the same charge; where it was evident that if any part of the charge was impertinent the whole was so. I have not thought it necessary, however, to examine the various exceptions in detail, as I have *518arrived at the conclusion that the several…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Palmer v. PalmerNew York Court of Chancery · 1828
- Bihin v. BihinNew York Supreme Court · 1863
- Halsted v. HalstedNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1894
- Perry v. PerryNew York Court of Chancery · 1847