Batchelder v. Batchelder
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Libel for a divorce, alleging that the husband (the libel-lee,) is and has been for more than three years past an habitual drunkard. The libel stated that the parties were married at Lowell, in Massachusetts, on the 21st day of July, 1833, but did not set forth any time as that at which they came to reside in New-Hampshire. They were, however, described in the libel as of the town and county of Hillsborough.
Read the full summary
Libel for a divorce, alleging that the husband (the libel-lee,) is and has been for more than three years past an habitual drunkard. The libel stated that the parties were married at Lowell, in Massachusetts, on the 21st day of July, 1833, but did not set forth any time as that at which they came to reside in New-Hampshire. They were, however, described in the libel as of the town and county of Hillsborough. One witness testified that the parties came to reside in Hillsborough in August, 1841, but there was no other evidence of a change of residence from Lowell. As to the fact of the alleged…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
The libel is insufficient. It appears on the face of it that the marriage was without this state, and yet it contains no averment that the parties were residents, or ever came to reside in this state. The general description of the parties, as of a certain town and county within this state, does not supply the want of a direct averment, and would not sustain our jurisdiction. 12 N. H. Rep. 80, Smith vs. Smith; 12 N. H. Rep. 200, 202, Greenlaw vs. Greenlaw; 13 N. H. Rep. 222, 225, Kimball vs. Kimball. One of the witnesses testified that the parties came to reside in Hillsborough in the month…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Clark v. ClarkSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1835
- Frary v. FrarySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1838
- Greenlaw v. GreenlawSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
- Smith v. SmithSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
- Kimball v. KimballSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1842