Legal Opinion

Bey v. Bey

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided May 15, 1914PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Gbiffin, Y. C.

The complainant in this cause, claiming to be the wife of the defendant, by virtue of a non-cevemonious or common law marriage, entered into June 22d, 1904, filed her bill for maintenance. The defendant denies the existence of the marriage. No claim is made that the parties were united by a ceremonious-marriage. The parties lived together until April 3d, 1912; during the intervening period they held themselves out as husband and wife, and were so known among their relatives and friends- and the public generally.

The complainant and defendant were acquainted from childhood. When…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Chicago v. SheldonSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
  2. Blackburn v. CrawfordsSupreme Court of the United States · 1866
  3. Cheney v. . ArnoldNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
  4. Dickerson v. BrownMississippi Supreme Court · 1873
  5. Van Tuyl v. Van TuylNew York Supreme Court · 1869

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of ErlangerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1932
  2. Sturm v. SturmNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1932
  3. Simmons v. SimmonsNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1955
  4. Tegenborg v. TegenborgNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1953
  5. Chirelstein v. ChirelsteinNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950

4 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