Ames v. Ames

Michigan Supreme Court

Ames v. Ames

209 N.W. 204, 235 Mich. 363, 1926 Mich. LEXIS 715

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJune 7, 1926

DocketDocket No. 169.

StatusPublished

This text of 209 N.W. 204 (Ames v. Ames) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ames v. Ames, 209 N.W. 204, 235 Mich. 363, 1926 Mich. LEXIS 715 (Mich. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

McDonald, J.

This cause is before the court for the second time. It is an appeal by the defendant from a decree granting the plaintiff a divorce. The facts are stated in the opinion of Justice Moore in the former case (231 Mich. 347). On that appeal the decree was reversed because of error in excluding the testimony of two boys, children of the parties. On the second hearing in the circuit court the testimony of the boys was taken. It was very unfavorable to the defendant, and materially strengthened the plaintiff’s case. There was also some additional testimony taken relative to the value of their joint property. The circuit judge again entered a decree for the plaintiff. The defendant again appeals.

Every question here involved was considered and discussed by Mr. Justice Moore in his opinion in the *364 former case, on a record more favorable to the defendant than this one. We adopt what he there said as the opinion in this case.

The decree of the circuit court is in all respects affirmed, with costs to the plaintiff.

Bird, c. J., and Sharpe, Snow, Steere, Fellows, Wiest, and Clark, JJ., concurred.

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

McDonald, J.

This cause is before the court for the second time. It is an appeal by the defendant from a decree granting the plaintiff a divorce. The facts are stated in the opinion of Justice Moore in the former case (231 Mich. 347). On that appeal the decree was reversed because of error in excluding the testimony of two boys, children of the parties. On the second hearing in the circuit court the testimony of the boys was taken. It was very unfavorable to the defendant, and materially strengthened the plaintiff’s case. There was also some additional testimony taken relative to the value of their joint property. The circuit judge again entered a decree for the plaintiff. The defendant again appeals.

Every question here involved was considered and discussed by Mr. Justice Moore in his opinion in the *364 former case, on a record more favorable to the defendant than this one. We adopt what he there said as the opinion in this case.

The decree of the circuit court is in all respects affirmed, with costs to the plaintiff.

Bird, c. J., and Sharpe, Snow, Steere, Fellows, Wiest, and Clark, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 N.W. 204, 235 Mich. 363, 1926 Mich. LEXIS 715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ames-v-ames-mich-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack