Alton v. Alton
| Decision Date | 01 June 1954 |
| Docket Number | No. 531,531 |
| Parties | ALTON v. ALTON |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs.
George H. T. Dudley, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, V.I., Abe Fortas, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. Hyman Smollar, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Petitioner brought this action for divorce in the Virgin Islands. Following argument and submission of the case in this Court, we were authoritatively advised that a final divorce decree had been entered on April 28, 1954, in the State of Connecticut on application of the respondent. The Superior Court of Connecticut found respondent to be a domiciliary of that State and petitioner here personally appeared in that action. Petitioner does not suggest that she repudiates her appearance in the Connecticut action, that the Connecticut decree is invalid in any way, or, in fact, that there is any colorable basis for challenging it. Nor does petitioner seek any ancillary relief in the instant divorce action that could not be obtained in an independent action in the Virgin Islands.
On the premises, this case appears to be moot. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated and the cause is remanded to the District Court with directions to vacate its judgment and to dismiss the proceeding upon the ground that the cause is moot.
Mr. Justice BLACK dissents. He is of the opinion that petitioner is entitled to have her divorce case tried in the Virgin Islands since under the holding and opinion in Williams v. State of North Carolina, 325 U.S. 226, 65 S.Ct. 1092, 89 L.Ed. 1577, the Connecticut divorce decree does not necessarily protect petitioner from conviction for bigamy in the Virgin Islands or anywhere else.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS and Mr. Justice JACKSON took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Granville-Smith v. Granville-Smith
... ... "any more evidence to offer on the question of domicile." Since no further evidence was proffered, the court, relying on its earlier opinion in Alton v. Alton (2 VI. 282), 121 F. Supp. 878, dismissed the complaint for want of jurisdiction over petitioner. 3 V.I. 705 [1] The Court of Appeals for the ... ...
-
Sosna v. Iowa 8212 762
...elsewhere would make this case moot and require dismissal. Alton v. Alton, 207 F.2d 667 (CA3 1950), dismissed as moot, 347 U.S. 610, 74 S.Ct. 736, 98 L.Ed. 987 (1954); SEC v. Medical Committee for Human Rights, 404 U.S. 403, 92 S.Ct. 577, 30 L.Ed.2d 560 (1972). But appellant brought this su......
-
Rosenstiel v. Rosenstiel
...element of divorce jurisdiction (Alton v. Alton, 207 F.2d 667, 677, judgment vacated and the proceeding dsmd. as moot 347 U.S. 610, 74 S.Ct. 736, 98 L.Ed. 987). To characterize one as a 'domiciliary' is to clothe him with the strongest possible ties to a jurisdiction. However, this court ha......
-
Crownover v. Crownover
...divorce law. By per curiam decision of the United States Supreme Court, June 1, 1954, the entire proceeding was dismissed as moot. 347 U.S. 610, 74 S.Ct. 736. That law made six weeks presence of plaintiff prima facie evidence of domicile. On appeal from the trial court's decision denying ju......
-
Should the Supreme Court stop inviting amici curiae to defend abandoned lower court decisions?
...due process for one state to take to itself the readjustment of domestic relations between those domiciled elsewhere."), vacated as moot, 347 U.S. 610 (44.) Alton, 207 F.2d at 672. (45.) See Alton v. Alton, 347 U.S. 610 (1954). (46.) See Respondent's Statement, Granville-Smith, 349 U.S. 1 (......