Cross v. Cross

75 So. 333, 200 Ala. 21, 1917 Ala. LEXIS 275
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided April 26, 1917·No. 6 Div. 490.·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

GARDNER, J.

Suit by the wife against the husband for alimony alone. The substance of the bill is set out in the foregoing statement of the case, and need not be here repeated. It is quite clear from an unbroken line of authorities in this state that the bill' has equity. Spafford v. Spafford, 74 South. 354 ; 1 Johnson v. Johnson, 195 Ala. 641, 71 South. 415; Clisby v. Clisby, 160 Ala. 572, 49 South. 445, 135 Am. St. Rep. 110; Murray v. Murray, 84 Ala. 363, 4 South. 239; Brady v. Brady, 144 Ala. 414, 39 South. 237; Glover v. Glover, 16 Ala. 440.

The assignments of demurrer also appear in the statement of the case, and we think it clearly appears that the bill was not subject to any of the assignments interposed. It results that the decree of the court below overruling the demurrer will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, O. J., and McCLBLLAN and SAYRE, JJ., concur.
1

199 Ala. 300.

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

Cross v. Cross, 75 So. 333, 200 Ala. 21, 1917 Ala. LEXIS 275 (Ala. 1917).

75 So. 333 (Cross v. Cross) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McDowell v. McDowell
261 So. 2d 415 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1971)
Cagle v. Cagle
63 So. 2d 381 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1953)
Taylor v. Taylor
37 So. 2d 645 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1948)
Love v. Love
194 So. 555 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1940)
Benton v. Benton
107 So. 827 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1926)