Legal Opinion · Dissent

Adam v. Adam

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided May 26, 1977No. 11823Published

1DissentWollman, Justice

I would affirm.

In her complaint for divorce, plaintiff alleged that one child had been born to her marriage with defendant. Defendant made the same allegation in his counterclaim for divorce. Nowhere in the several affidavits filed by plaintiff is there any contention that she was not aware of the allegation that she had made in her complaint or that defendant had made in his counterclaim with respect to the birth of the child. Plaintiff does not contend that she was unaware of the child’s paternity at the time the divorce action was commenced. Thus the situation that existed in Anderson v.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Masek v. MasekSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Anderson v. AndersonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Brockel v. BrockelSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1964
  4. Anderson v. AndersonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API