Besore v. Besore
| Decision Date | 31 July 1873 |
| Citation | 49 Ga. 378 |
| Parties | OSCAR E. BESORE, plaintiff in err0r. v. TALLULAH E. BESORE, by her next friend, defendant in error. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Husband and wife. Divorce. Alimony. Infant. Before Judge Hill. Bibb Superior Court. April Term, 1873.
For the facts of this case, see the decision.
Lyon & Irvin, for plaintiff in error.
Poe & Hall, by Z. D. Harrison, for defendant.
The complainant having filed her libel for divorce against the defendant, made application to the Court for the allowance of temporary alimony, and for payment of counsel fees. The Court below, after hearing evidence as to the amount of the defendant's property, and the condition of the parties, ordered that the defendant should pay the plaintiff $45 00 per month for temporary alimony, and should pay to her counsel $150 00, as a retaining fee in the libel suit for divorce, to which the defendant excepted. The defendant also made a motion to dismiss the whole proceeding, on the ground that an infant married female, under twenty-one years of age, could not maintain an action of libel for divorce against her husband, which motion was overruled, and the defendant excepted.
1. If the wife is of sufficient age to enter into a marriage contract, no good reason occurs to us why she may not maintain an action in the Courts to dissolve it, for any of the causes authorized by the laws of the State. Marriage contracts and settlements made by infants who are of lawful age to marry, are binding, as if made by adults: Code, section 2692. The complainant in this case was of lawful age to contract marriage and to make a marriage settlement, and such contracts made by infant females being as binding upon them as if made by adults, it would seem that they would be as competent to *maintain an action to dissolve the marriage contract, for any of the causes authorized by law, as an adult married woman would be. If an infant married woman is bound by the contract as an adult married woman would be, it is difficult to perceive why she should not have the same right to prosecute a suit for a dissolution of that contract as to an adult married woman would have. There was no error in overruling the motion to dismiss the proceedings.
2. We cannot say that there was such an abuse of the discretion of the Court below in allowing the temporary alimony in this case as would authorize this Court to interfere and control it, although we should have been better...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hinkle v. Lovelace
...next friend is not competent to do so. Richardson v. Richardson, 50 Vt. 119; 2 Bishop on Marriage & Divorce (6 Ed.), sec. 306 A; Besore v. Besore, 49 Ga. 378; Bradford Abend, 89 Ill. 78; Worthy v. Worthy, 36 Ga. 45; Mohler v. Shanks, 93 Iowa 273; Birdsell v. Birdsell, 33 Kan. 433; Winslow v......
-
Hinkle v. Lovelace
...the suit shows more clearly why the plaintiff only can make the affidavit to the petition. Richardson v. Richardson, 50 Vt. 119; Besore v. Besore, 49 Ga. 378; 2 Bishop, Marriage & Divorce (6th Ed.) § 306a; Winslow v. Winslow, 7 Mass. 96; Birdzell v. Birdzell, 33 Kan. 433, 6 Pac. 561, 52 Am.......
-
Carroll v. Carroll
...v. Spooner, supra. See dissenting opinion by two Justices in Bentley v. Bentley, 149 Ga. 707, 102 S. E. 21, 17 A. L. R. 896. In Besore v. Besore, 49 Ga. 378, it was held that an infant married woman who is of statutory marriageable age may maintain an action for divorce; and in Bentley v. B......
-
Carroll v. Carroll
...Spooner, supra. See dissenting opinion by two Justices in Bentley v. Bentley, 149 Ga. 707, 102 S.E. 21, 17 A.L.R. 896. In Besore v. Besore, 49 Ga. 378, it was held that an infant married woman who is of statutory marriageable age may maintain an action for divorce; and in Bentley v. Bentley......