Wright v. Wright
New York Court of Chancery
The bill was, filed for a divorce a mensa et tlioro. A petitian was now presented, on the part of the wife, for alimony and money to carry .on the suit. Affidavits, tending to criminote the wife, were read in opposition. Mr. J. Radcliff, supported the petition. Mr. J. P. Hall, contra.
Read the full summary
The bill was, filed for a divorce a mensa et tlioro. A petitian was now presented, on the part of the wife, for alimony and money to carry .on the suit. Affidavits, tending to criminote the wife, were read in opposition. Mr. J. Radcliff, supported the petition. Mr. J. P. Hall, contra. He contended, that the conduct of the complainant, as detailed in the affidavits he had read, debarred her from the right to advances'and alimony: Bedell v. same, 2 J. C. R. 604; and that the court could withhold the same. The words of the statute (2 R. S. 148, § 58) showed the matter was in the “ discretion” of…
1Opinion of the Court
The Vice-Chancellor.
There are often difficulties in cases of this kind; and frequently a great difference of statements. There may be a point of danger on both sides : an allowance of money might encourage a wife to institute a vexatious suit, while, on the other hand, the withholding it would sometimes stop a meritorious proceeding and even close tho doors of justice against a feme covert. ■ There are difficulties with regard to the merits: but I cannot go into them at this stage of the suit. An order of the nature which is now asked *'or’ *S a^mosí a of course. It is granted, even where…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Harding v. HardingIllinois Supreme Court · 1892
- Jeter v. JeterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1860
- Frickel v. FrickelThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1893
- Leslie v. LeslieNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1869
- Lishey v. LisheyCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1873