Legal Opinion

Bond v. Meredith

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided April 2, 1951No. File 78501PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMurphy, J.

The evidence does not satisfy me that the defendant is entirely responsible for the dissension that developed between the plaintiff and her husband and led to the breaking up of their home. Rather, the plaintiff herself was principally at fault so that when the defendant came into the husband’s life his affections had been almost completely alienated. Whether the plaintiff could have recaptured the husband’s love and esteem if the defendant had not appeared ir the picture is extremely doubtful. Their relations had reached such a low state that even without the defendant’s intercession…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Amellin v. LeoneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
  2. Parker v. GordonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1949
  3. Gondek v. PliskaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1949
  4. Maggay v. NikitkoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
  5. Miller v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1933

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Murray v. City of MilfordCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967
  2. Murray v. City Of MilfordCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967

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

Powered by the Exa API