Simons v. Simons
Cases that cite this one
18 later published cases cite this decision.
- Fairclough v. St. Amand (Ala. 1927)
- Shapiro v. Shapiro (Ala. 1966)
- Miller v. Miller (N.D. 1949)
- Robson v. Kramer (Iowa 1932)
- Alderdyce v. Alderdyce (Mich. 1928)
- Bancroft v. Bancroft (Cal. 1918)
- Van Slyke v. Van Slyke (Mich. 1915)
- Robinson v. Robinson (Wash. 1914)
- Karren v. Karren (Utah 1902)
- Orth v. Orth (Mich. 1888)
- Kull v. Losch (Mich. 1950)
- Zirkalos v. Zirkalos (Mich. 1949)
- Hall v. Hall (Fla. 1927)
- McGraw v. McGraw (R.I. 1927)
- Breen v. Breen (Mich. 1909)
- Brigham (Mass. 1900)
- Dow v. Blake (Ill. 1893)
- Carlisle v. Carlisle (Mich. 1893)
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
This is an appeal by the complainant from the decree dismissing the bill, which was filed to set aside a previous decree of divorce granted upon the complaint of this complainant, and which she now alleges was procured by collusion with her husband, the defendant. In the bill first filed and upon which the decree was granted she alleged that the acts done as therein set forth, “ were committed without the consent, connivance, privity or procurement of your oratrix, and that such bill is not founded on, or exhibited in consequence of any collusion, agreement or understanding whatever, between the parties thereto or between your oratrix or any other person,” — and this was sworn to. Without this sworn allegation in her bill of complaint it would not have been entertained, and she having thereby given the court jurisdiction and permitted the case to proceed to a final decree, she cannot now be permitted to take advantage of her own wrong and show that there was
The decree dismissing the bill will be affirmed with costs.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.