Banister v. Banister

22 N.E. 900, 150 Mass. 280, 1889 Mass. LEXIS 76
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided November 30, 1889·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

C. Allen, J.

The Pub. Sts. c. 146, § 6, provide that, “ when the libellant has left the county in which the parties have lived together, the adverse party still living therein, the libel shall be heard and determined in the court held for that county.” This obviously means, when the libellant has left the county in which the parties have last lived together. These parties last lived together in Norfolk County, the place where unquestionably the libellee had his domicil, and at the time when this libel was brought, as well as when it was heard, he still lived there. By the plain meaning of the statute, the libel must be heard and determined in that county.

Exceptions overruled.

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

Banister v. Banister, 22 N.E. 900, 150 Mass. 280, 1889 Mass. LEXIS 76 (Mass. 1889).

22 N.E. 900 (Banister v. Banister) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Holt v. Holt
149 N.E. 40 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1925)
Sampson v. Sampson
223 Mass. 451 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1916)