Opinion

Stokes v. Stokes

  • 1 Mo. 320
Court
Supreme Court of Missouri
Filed
May 15, 1823
Status
Published
Author
Jones
On the bench
Gikk, Jones, Pettibone
Cited by
7 cases

The opinion

Jones, J.

I concur in the above opinion, except as to that part of it which relates to the deed of separation, which, I think amounts to a bar.

M’Gikk, C. J.

In the case of Stokes v. Stokes, my opinion is r

First. That residence of one year for a divorce, a mensa et thoro is not necessary.

Second. That under our statute, adultery is a cause of divorce, a mensa et thoro.

Third. That the deed of separation is no bar to a divorce.

Eourth. That adultery, committed in England, is cognizable in our Courts.

Fifth. That the proceedings, under our statute, are sui generis, neither chancery nor ecclesiastical, but that the parties must make their averment, with reasonable legal precision.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.