Church v. Mehitable Church
Cases that cite this one
4 later published cases cite this decision.
- Poole v. Poole (Iowa 1936)
- Marsh v. Marsh (New Jersey Court of Chancery 1863)
- Adams v. Adams (Superior Court of New Hampshire 1850)
- Ferris v. Ferris (Conn. 1830)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The charge is too loose. It is impossible for the respondent to know, under such a general allegation as this, to what charge she has to answer. The allegations ought to be so certain and definite that the attorney-general may have the means of prosecuting the offenders. This offence seems growing to an alarming degree. The particeps criminis must be named, or there must be. an averment that he is unknown to the libellant. The libel was afterwards amended
Note. The chief justice observed that there was an excellent provision in the civil law, that every libel for a divorce shall be supported by the oath of the party that he knows or believes all the allegations in the libel to be true.
[Choate vs. Choate, post, 391.—Ed.]
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.