Gould v. Gould

197 N.W. 505, 226 Mich. 340, 1924 Mich. LEXIS 536
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 5, 1924
DocketDocket No. 95.
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 197 N.W. 505 (Gould v. Gould) 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
Gould v. Gould, 197 N.W. 505, 226 Mich. 340, 1924 Mich. LEXIS 536 (Mich. 1924).

Opinion

*341 Clark, C. J.

A decree for divorce, entered January 17, 1920, gave the custody of children to defendant, the mother, and required plaintiff, the father, to contribute toward their support. Defendant, on August 31,1922, petitioned that the decree be modified by increasing the amount so to be contributed. 3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 11417. The petition was granted. Plaintiff has appealed.

No new facts or change in condition of the parties arising since the decree to justify its modification are shown. It is well settled that in the absence of such showing the decree may not be so modified. Smith v. Smith, 139 Mich. 133; Quinn v. Quinn, ante, 239.

Judge North’s opinion indicates that he found no new facts, but that he thought the original decree inequitable. But it is also settled that this proceeding is “not a rehearing of the original case, or a review of the equities of the original decree.” Sherman v. Kent, 223 Mich. 200.

The order is reversed, without prejudice and without costs. The cause is remanded.

McDonald, Bird, Sharpe, Moore, Steere, Fellows, and Wiest, JJ., concurred.

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

Related

Stros v. Stros
181 N.W.2d 26 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1970)
Meeker v. Harrington
166 N.W.2d 276 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1968)
Schmiedeknecht v. Lucie
163 N.W.2d 706 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1968)
Verbeke v. Verbeke
90 N.W.2d 489 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1958)
Slater v. Slater
42 N.W.2d 742 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1950)
Chipman v. Chipman
14 N.W.2d 502 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1944)
Romanowski v. Romanowski
14 N.W.2d 23 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1944)
Wellman v. Wellman
9 N.W.2d 579 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1943)
Binkow v. Binkow
299 N.W. 734 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1941)
Sims v. Sims
299 N.W. 158 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1941)
Baxter v. Baxter
296 N.W. 681 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1941)
Loomis v. Loomis
262 N.W. 331 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1935)
Hill v. Hill
254 N.W. 145 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1934)
Broadwell v. Broadwell
245 N.W. 511 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1932)
Tuthill v. Tuthill
243 N.W. 1 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1932)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
197 N.W. 505, 226 Mich. 340, 1924 Mich. LEXIS 536, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gould-v-gould-mich-1924.