Woodruff v. . Woodruff
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBaeNhill, J.
As the defendant alleges intrinsic fraud motion in the cause is her proper remedy. Horne v. Edwards, ante, 622, and cases there cited.
Plaintiff’s original action was instituted under the provisions of O. S., 1659 (4) as amended. Except where the separation is in consequence of a criminal act committed by the defendant prior to such divorce proceedings, “a separation of husband and wife” as used in the statute means more than merely living apart. Business and other necessities sometimes require the husband to live at one place and the wife at another. This does not mean necessarily that there…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sitterson v. . SittersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Nichols v. Nichols.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
- Cooke v. CookeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Cooke v. . CookeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Lee v. . LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Byers v. . ByersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- Byers v. ByersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- Carpenter v. CarpenterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
- Young v. . YoungSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
- Byers v. . ByersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.