Mix v. Mix
New York Court of Chancery
THE petitioner stated, among other things, that she was a native of England, and, on the 9th, of October, 1808, intermarried, in that country, with the defendant, a citizen of the United States.
Read the full summary
THE petitioner stated, among other things, that she was a native of England, and, on the 9th, of October, 1808, intermarried, in that country, with the defendant, a citizen of the United States. The defendant dissipated her fortune, to the amount of more than 3,000 pounds sterling; and they came together to the United States, in June, 1809, and returned again to England,- in January, 1810, where the defendant left her, in June, 1810, destitute of the means of support, and returned to the United States. Before leaving her, the defendant had treated her with great cruelty and barbarity, &c. In…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The statute gives this court jurisdiction over divorces, a vinculo matrimonii, for adultery, and over divorces, a mensa et thoro, for cruelty, only in the case of parties of a certain designation and description.(a) *110(2 N. R. L. 197. s. 1 and 10.) Whether this be one of those cases in which the court is authorized to interfere and sustain the inquiry, remains yet to be ascertained. As the defendant has put in a demurrer to the bill, it would seem to be premature to make any order touching the maintenance of the wife, founded on the main subject matter of the bill, until the…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Griffin v. . GriffinNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Ex parte SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
- Dunnock v. DunnockHigh Court of Chancery of Maryland · 1852
- Coles v. ColesHigh Court of Chancery of Maryland · 1851
- Kaufmann v. KaufmannSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.