Garrison v. Garrison, Gen. No. 68--72
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
| Writing for the Court | DAVIS; ABRAHAMSON, P.J., and SEIDENFELD |
| Citation | 107 Ill.App.2d 311,246 N.E.2d 9 |
| Parties | Cloann GARRISON, Appellant, v. David Edward GARRISON, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | Gen. No. 68--72 |
| Decision Date | 20 March 1969 |
Page 9
v.
David Edward GARRISON, Appellee.
Page 10
Vincent F. Lucchese, Chicago, John Knight, Oak Park, for appellant.
Carbary, Carbary & Chapski, Elgin, for appellee.
DAVIS, Justice.
The sole issue before the court on this appeal is whether the Circuit Court of Kane County had jurisdiction to enter the decree for divorce.
The plaintiff filed suit for separate maintenance from her husband. He answered and counterclaimed for divorce[107 Ill.App.2d 312] on the grounds of adultery. After extended hearings, the trial court denied the plaintiff's claim for separate maintenance and granted the defendant a divorce on his counterclaim. The plaintiff then contended that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter a decree in that neither the plaintiff nor the defendant was a resident of Illinois. The trial court found that the defendant was and always had been a resident of Illinois. The plaintiff appealed.
In her suit for separate maintenance, the plaintiff alleged that both she and her husband were residents of Kane county. Her complaint further stated that because of her health, she had been spending portions of the winter months in Florida, for some years; that the parties maintained two homes--one in Florida and one in Kane County.
Regardless of the place of the plaintiff's residence, her separate maintenance action was properly filed in Kane County, if the defendant resided there. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1967, ch. 68, par. 22.)
The defendant's answer and counterclaim for divorce admitted that both parties were residents of Kane County. Section 2 of the Divorce Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.1967, ch. 40, par. 3) provides that to be entitled to a divorce the party obtaining it must have resided within the State one year prior to filing his or her complaint; or that either the plaintiff or the defendant must have resided within the State for six months if the offense complained of was committed within the State. Section 5 of the Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.1967, ch. 40, par. 6) provides that the proceedings may be had in any county in which either the plaintiff or the defendant resides.
A substantial portion of the plaintiff's brief and argument is devoted to the contention that the plaintiff was not a resident of Kane County, and that, therefore, the court lacked jurisdiction to enter a decree for divorce. [107 Ill.App.2d 313] However, the trial court found that she committed adultery in Kane County, and no appeal has been taken from this finding. Under the provisions of the above statutes, the plaintiff could properly invoke the jurisdiction of the court in her separate maintenance suit without being a resident of Kane County, if her husband resided there, and even if he had only resided there for the last six months. Under such circumstances, the court had jurisdiction to enter a decree for divorce.
By virtue of the jurisdiction issue which the plaintiff has raised, we will direct our attention only to the question of the place of the defendant's residence.
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Green v. Green, Nos. 58227
...or is not one's residence is the intent of that person to live there as his permanent home (Citations.)' (Garrison v. Garrison (1969), 107 Ill.App.2d 311, 314, 246 N.E.2d 9, 11.) Whether or not a party has abandoned one residence in favor of another in a different jurisdiction is question o......
-
Farah v. Farah, No. 59651
...or is not one's residence is the intent of that person to live [25 Ill.App.3d 488] there as his permanent home.' (Garrison v. Garrison, 107 Ill.App.2d 311, 314, 246 N.E.2d 9, 11.) The issue of existence of intent is purely a question which must be determined initially by the trier of fact i......
-
Miller v. Police Bd., City of Chicago, No. 62213
...his 'residence' in Chicago, as the terms 'reside' and 'residence' have generally been held to be synonymous. (See Garrison v. Garrison, 107 Ill.App.2d 311, 246 N.E.2d 9; In re Estate of Quinn, 283 Ill.App. 597.) The terms 'reside' and 'residence' denote that a person has a permanent abode o......
-
Cohn's Estate, Matter of, No. 80-690
...and permanence of abode along with physical presence are required to establish "resident" status. Garrison v. Garrison (1969), 107 Ill.App.2d 311, 246 N.E.2d From the record it appears that Joshua's stay at the Rosenbaum's was only intended to be a temporary arrangement. Both the Rosenbaums......
-
Green v. Green, Nos. 58227
...or is not one's residence is the intent of that person to live there as his permanent home (Citations.)' (Garrison v. Garrison (1969), 107 Ill.App.2d 311, 314, 246 N.E.2d 9, 11.) Whether or not a party has abandoned one residence in favor of another in a different jurisdiction is question o......
-
Farah v. Farah, No. 59651
...or is not one's residence is the intent of that person to live [25 Ill.App.3d 488] there as his permanent home.' (Garrison v. Garrison, 107 Ill.App.2d 311, 314, 246 N.E.2d 9, 11.) The issue of existence of intent is purely a question which must be determined initially by the trier of fact i......
-
Miller v. Police Bd., City of Chicago, No. 62213
...his 'residence' in Chicago, as the terms 'reside' and 'residence' have generally been held to be synonymous. (See Garrison v. Garrison, 107 Ill.App.2d 311, 246 N.E.2d 9; In re Estate of Quinn, 283 Ill.App. 597.) The terms 'reside' and 'residence' denote that a person has a permanent abode o......
-
Cohn's Estate, Matter of, No. 80-690
...and permanence of abode along with physical presence are required to establish "resident" status. Garrison v. Garrison (1969), 107 Ill.App.2d 311, 246 N.E.2d From the record it appears that Joshua's stay at the Rosenbaum's was only intended to be a temporary arrangement. Both the Rosenbaums......