Superior Court of Delaware, 1917

Palese v. Palese

Palese v. Palese
Superior Court of Delaware · Decided June 14, 1917 · Rice
29 Del. 584; 6 Boyce 584; 101 A. 438; 1917 Del. LEXIS 31

Counsel

Armon D. Chaytor, Jr., for plaintiff., Frank L. Speakman for defendant.

Palese v. Palese

Opinion of the Court

Rice, J.:

The court is of the opinion that, where the defense in an action for divorce is adultery on the part of the plaintiff, the better practice would be, and should be, to file an answer setting up the adulterous acts relied upon, with the same particularity as would be required in a petition alleging adultery as a ground for divorce. As the practice has been somewhat unsettled up to this time, we will give the defendant in this case reasonable opportunity to file an answer. If that can be done during the noon recess, the plaintiff may then elect whether he will proceed with the hearing or ask for a continuance.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.