New York Supreme Court, 1899

Herron v. Herron

Herron v. Herron
New York Supreme Court · Decided July 15, 1899 · Dunwell
28 Misc. 323; 59 N.Y.S. 861

Counsel

James O. Sebring, for motion. ■, Willard S. Reed, opposed.

Herron v. Herron

Opinion of the Court

Dunwell, J.

Motion, for alimony and counsel fee, in action by wife, on ground of nullity, it being alleged that the marriage took place before she arrived at the legal age of consent.

Although the Code of Civil Procedure does not provide for alimony or counsel fee in actions to dissolve marriage for nullity, it is, nevertheless, held in numerous cases that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction of the subject, as successor to the Court of Chancery. Fiero on Special Actions, vol. 2, p. 959, and cases cited.

But in Meo v. Meo, 22 Abb. N. C. 58, Judge O’Brien, on a review of the cases, shows that in an action brought by the wife, alleging nullity, the weight of authority is against granting such allowances.

The motion must be denied, but without costs.

Motion denied, without costs.

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