Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Cole v. Cole

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 6, 1961No. 5-2285Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partEd. F. McFaddin, Associate Justice

I agree that the award of $700.00 per month to Mrs. Cole was proper and should be affirmed; but I cannot agree with that part of the majority opinion which holds that Mrs. Cole has proved that she is a resident of Pulaski County.

The majority opinion says, “The proof in the record consisted only of the testimony of the parties to the action.” Thus, the opinion shows on its face that there was no corroboration of Mrs. Cole’s testimony as to residence. Section 34-1208, Ark. Stats., says that the plaintiff must prove residence; and we have a long line of cases which hold that a divorce will not…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wood v. WoodSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1891
  2. Goodlett v. GoodlettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
  3. Gilliam v. GilliamSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1960
  4. Wood v. WoodSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API