Legal Opinion

Tuttle v. Tuttle

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided January 4, 1938PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarble, J.

It is the general rule that a stranger to a decree of divorce has no standing on which to base a motion to set aside or annul the decree. 99 A. L. R. 1310. But the petition in the present case is in no respect an attack on the judgment rendered. It does not seek the abolition of rights already adjudicated but merely asks that those rights be made effective by relation from the date of their determination.

It is true “that divorce proceedings abate upon the death of either of the parties.” Leclerc v. Leclerc, 85 N. H. 121, 122. But this rule is not literally a hard and fast one. “There may,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bell v. BellSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
  2. Tyler v. AspinwallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1901

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Shammas v. ShammasSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1952
  2. Stritch v. StritchSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1965
  3. Bussey v. BusseySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1949
  4. Hazen v. HazenSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1982
  5. Thrash v. ThrashMississippi Supreme Court · 1980

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API