Legal Opinion

Ela v. Ela

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided June 5, 1884PublishedCited by 1 opinion

The defendant introduced evidence tending to show that the plaintiff left the state immediately upon the fact becoming known that an indictment had been found, and had since resided in New York city, and had concealed her residence from the defendant until December, 1883, when it was with difficulty discovered by him.

Read the full summary

The defendant introduced evidence tending to show that the plaintiff left the state immediately upon the fact becoming known that an indictment had been found, and had since resided in New York city, and had concealed her residence from the defendant until December, 1883, when it was with difficulty discovered by him. The defendant then offered to show that the plaintiff’s reputation for truth and veracity, in April, 1882, was bad, and also offered to show, by the same evidence which he introduced at the original trial of the libel, that the testimony of the plaintiff on that trial was false.…

1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.

As to the motion for a new trial of the libel for divorce, the exceptions are not insisted on in the argument, and are overruled. The exception to the exclusion of the evidence relating to the plaintiff’s reputation for truth and veracity, in April, 1882, was the only material exception upon that branch of the case, and, so far as appears, that evidence was known to the defendant, and could have been produced on the former trial; and it was properly excluded.

The petition for a modification of the decree as to alimony is of a different character. It is not a petition for a new trial, but an…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Folsom v. FolsomSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1874

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Lebeau v. LebeauSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1921

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

Powered by the Exa API