Legal Opinion

Penningroth v. Penningroth

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided May 22, 1897PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Cowt. — Hon. Thomas A. Russell, Judge. Judge. Bond concurring, Judge Bland not sitting. The facts of this case do not warrant the order of •the court below, in plaintiff’s favor, for alimony' and suit money. R. S. 1889, sec. 4505; Adams v. Adams, 49 Mo. App. 592; Dawson vr-Dawson, 37 Id. 207; Waters v. Waters, 49 Mo. 385; State ex rel. v. St. Louis Court of Appeals, 99 Id. 216; Bosenfeld v. Bosenfeld, 63 Mo.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Cowt. — Hon. Thomas A. Russell, Judge. Judge. Bond concurring, Judge Bland not sitting. The facts of this case do not warrant the order of •the court below, in plaintiff’s favor, for alimony' and suit money. R. S. 1889, sec. 4505; Adams v. Adams, 49 Mo. App. 592; Dawson vr-Dawson, 37 Id. 207; Waters v. Waters, 49 Mo. 385; State ex rel. v. St. Louis Court of Appeals, 99 Id. 216; Bosenfeld v. Bosenfeld, 63 Mo. App. 411; Isbell v. Weiss, 60 Id. 54. The allowance of alimony in this case was a just .one, very moderate, and made upon the fullest investigation…

1Opinion of the CourtBiggs, J.

In actions of divorce will alimony pendente lite be awarded to the wife, although she may be possessed of a liberal fortune in her own right? This question is presented by this record. The present action is by the wife against the husband. The alleged ground's of divorce are indignities offered her by defendant. The answer is in the nature of a cross-bill, which contains counter charges of a like nature. An application was made by plaintiff for alimony pendente lite. At the hearing the plaintiff admitted that she owned property in her own right of the value of $25,000 or $30,000, and that she…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Collins v. . CollinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
  2. Porter v. PorterMississippi Supreme Court · 1866
  3. Kenemer v. KenemerIndiana Supreme Court · 1866
  4. Daiger v. DaigerHigh Court of Chancery of Maryland · 1850
  5. Coad v. CoadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1876

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Hood v. HoodCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1921
  2. Kelly v. KellySupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
  3. Meyers v. MeyersMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
  4. Whitwell v. WhitwellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1927
  5. Richardson v. RichardsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1954

12 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