Legal Opinion

Martin v. Martin

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided July 26, 1946PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ADAMS, J.:

Appellant sued to annul her marriage to one Joe Martin. A decree pro confesso was entered against Martin and the cause referred to a master who took testimony and recommended the granting of the relief prayed for. The chancellor held that the evidence did not show appellant was not “in her right mind when she married the defendant”, and denied the relief.

From our study of the record it is shown without contradiction that appellant never consented to the marriage and was not aware of it until several hours after the ceremony had been performed; that she never ratified or in any way…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Husted v. HustedCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  2. Mahan v. MahanSupreme Court of Florida · 1956
  3. In re the Guardianship of O'BrienCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API