Ackley v. Ackley

Appellate Court of Illinois

Ackley v. Ackley

160 Ill. App. 575, 1911 Ill. App. LEXIS 930

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedApril 7, 1911

DocketGen. No. 16,638

StatusPublished

This text of 160 Ill. App. 575 (Ackley v. Ackley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ackley v. Ackley, 160 Ill. App. 575, 1911 Ill. App. LEXIS 930 (Ill. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.

Plaintiff in error filed his hill for divorce in the Superior Court of Cook county against the defendant in error, and subsequently his amended bill. Defendant in error filed her answer thereto, and plaintiff in error filed his replication. Thereafter defendant in error filed her cross-bill for separate maintenance, alleging that cross-defendant had been guilty of certain specific acts of cruelty. Cross-defendant filed his answer thereto, denying each alleged act of cruelty. Upon the hearing before the court a decree was entered dismissing plaintiff in error’s bill and granting the prayer of the cross-bill. The decree orders the plaintiff in error to pay defendant in error $10 per week as and for separate maintenance for herself and their two children, and the costs to be taxed in the cause, including $200 solicitor’s fees, which were to be paid on or before December 10, 1908. The decree contains no findings of fact, and it is not supported by a certificate of evidence, as appears by the record. The decree is therefore reversed and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Presiding Justice Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.

Plaintiff in error filed his hill for divorce in the Superior Court of Cook county against the defendant in error, and subsequently his amended bill. Defendant in error filed her answer thereto, and plaintiff in error filed his replication. Thereafter defendant in error filed her cross-bill for separate maintenance, alleging that cross-defendant had been guilty of certain specific acts of cruelty. Cross-defendant filed his answer thereto, denying each alleged act of cruelty. Upon the hearing before the court a decree was entered dismissing plaintiff in error’s bill and granting the prayer of the cross-bill. The decree orders the plaintiff in error to pay defendant in error $10 per week as and for separate maintenance for herself and their two children, and the costs to be taxed in the cause, including $200 solicitor’s fees, which were to be paid on or before December 10, 1908. The decree contains no findings of fact, and it is not supported by a certificate of evidence, as appears by the record. The decree is therefore reversed and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

160 Ill. App. 575, 1911 Ill. App. LEXIS 930, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ackley-v-ackley-illappct-1911.