Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Family Law

1931

New York

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Divorce - Domicil - Recognition Of Foreign Decrees, Florence K. Frankel Dec 1931

Divorce - Domicil - Recognition Of Foreign Decrees, Florence K. Frankel

Michigan Law Review

The New York Court of Appeals has re-emphasized some well-established principles of divorce jurisdiction in the recent case of Fischer v. Fischer. In a suit involving the validity of a second marriage, W proved a Nevada divorce from her first husband, a citizen of New York, who had been served in New York but had not appeared to defend the litigation. The court denied recognition to the Nevada decree because W's residence in Nevada, while it conformed with the statutory requirements of that forum, was proved to have been acquired solely for the purpose of securing a divorce. The …


Conflict Of Laws-Recognition Of Foreign Alimony Decree Jun 1931

Conflict Of Laws-Recognition Of Foreign Alimony Decree

Michigan Law Review

In 1928, a New York court ordered D, who was suing for annulment of his marriage, to pay alimony pendente lite and attorney's fees to W. This judgment had remained unsatisfied. W, in 1931, brought a bill in equity in Massachusetts asking that D, now a resident of Massachusetts, be ordered to pay the amount due on the judgment. Held, although the local statute (Gen. L., c. 209, sec. 6) did not permit suits at law between husband and wife, that mere circumstance was not sufficient grounds for granting equitable relief on the ground of the inadequacy of the …


Marriage--Common-Law Marriage After The Removal Of Impediments Existing At The Time Of The Ceremonial Marriage Feb 1931

Marriage--Common-Law Marriage After The Removal Of Impediments Existing At The Time Of The Ceremonial Marriage

Michigan Law Review

An action was instituted for the removal of respondent as administrator of the estate of X, on the ground that the respondent was not the legal husband of the intestate. Both respondent and deceased had living spouses at the time they entered into a ceremonial marriage in 1898, but whether or not they knew of the impediments to the validity of their marriage did not appear on the record. In 1924, the last obstacle to their marriage was removed by the death of respondent's first wife. The parties cohabited for thirty years and continued so to do subsequent to. the …