Legal Opinion

Dorsett v. Dorsett

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 3, 1910No. Appeal, No. 91PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal, No. 91, Oct. T., 1909, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. No. 4, Allegheny Co., Fourth Term, 1908, No. 468, dismissing bill in equity in case of Samuel Dorsett v. Elizabeth Dorsett. Bill in equity for an injunction, an account, and for a conveyance of real estate. Before Swearingen, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the case. Errors assigned were (1) decree dismissing the bill and, (2) refusal to permit the plaintiff to testify.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Mestrezat,

This is a bill in equity filed by the plaintiff against his wife praying for an account and that the defendant be restrained from transferring or incumbering the real estate described in *335the bill and be decreed to hold the undivided one-half thereof in trust for plaintiff and be directed to convey the same to him. It is averred that “ in August, 1905, defendant deserted the plaintiff and separated herself from him without sufficient cause and has not lived with or had any marital relations with him since.” The defendant filed a responsive answer which denied…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Heckman v. HeckmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. McSwain v. McSwainSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  2. Hack v. HackSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. Schomaker v. SchomakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
  4. Ireland v. IrelandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
  5. McMillen v. McCullough, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Mercer County1937

1 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