McCaleb v. McCaleb
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Canfield & Starbuck, and Eugene W. Squier, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
On September 29, 1910, the court below duly made an order in this action requiring the defendant to pay to the plaintiff “in advance, as alimony while this action is pending, the sum of ten dollars a week commencing on the date hereof, to enable said plaintiff to support herself.”
The cause was tried in November, 1910, and on December 27, 1910, the court rendered its judgment denying the plaintiff’s prayer for divorce and for the custody of the children, and declaring “that the allowance of ten dollars per week to said plaintiff for alimony pendente lite be and the same is hereby discontinued…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Howell v. HowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by24 opinions
- Gossman v. GossmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Hall v. HallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Hall v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Schnerr v. SchnerrCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Patton v. PattonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.