Legal Opinion
Patey v. Peaslee
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided January 19, 1955No. 4296PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKenison, C. J.
At common law the marriage of an insane person was absolutely void. True v. Ranney, 21 N. H. 52; Keyes v. Keyes, 22 N. H. 553. Since the marriage was void, it could be challenged in a collateral proceeding and the surviving spouse could take no interest in the marital property. Hampstead v. Plaistow, 49 N. H. 84, 98; Hayes v. Rollins, 68 N. H. 191. Where the common-law rule has not been modified by statute, a collateral attack upon such a marriage after the death of a spouse has been allowed. Unity v. Belgrade, 76 Me. 419; Williams v. Williams, 83 Colo. 180. If, however, such a marriage is…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Latham v. Father DivineNew York Court of Appeals · 1949
- Bryant v. . BryantSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- Bird v. PlunkettSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1953
- Vesey v. VeseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
- Woronzoff-Daschkoff v. Woronzoff-DaschkoffNew York Court of Appeals · 1952
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Riddell v. EdwardsAlaska Supreme Court · 2003
- In the Matter of Paula Geraghty and Kenneth GeraghtySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2016
- In re the Estate of SantolinoNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2005
- Riddell v. EdwardsAlaska Supreme Court · 2003