Kruse v. Kruse

25 Mo. 68
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided March 15, 1857·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

Scott, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a petition for a divorce instituted in the St. Louis Circuit Court on account of desertion and absence. Although the plaintiff may have been married in this state, yet that circumstance of itself does not entitle her to sue in our courts for a divorce. It appears from the evidence in the cause that [70]*70the plaintiff was a non-resident of this state when she instituted this suit, and that she continued so up to the time of the trial of the cause. The second section of the act concerning divorce and alimony, (R. C. 1845,) under which this proceeding was begun, clearly shows that the plaintiff must be a resident of this state.

Judge Ryland concurring,

the judgment will be affirmed;

Judge Leonard absent.

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

Kruse v. Kruse, 25 Mo. 68 (Mo. 1857).

25 Mo. 68 (Kruse v. Kruse) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sharp v. Sharp
416 S.W.2d 691 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1967)
Mestre v. Pabeyón
84 P.R. 356 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1962)
Phelps v. Phelps
246 S.W.2d 838 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1952)
George v. George
228 S.W. 408 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1921)
Winkler v. Winkler
199 S.W. 981 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1917)
McConnell v. McConnell
151 S.W. 175 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1912)
Martin v. Martin
55 So. 632 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1911)
Hamill v. Talbott
81 Mo. App. 210 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1899)
Werz v. Werz
11 Mo. App. 26 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1881)
Pate v. Pate
6 Mo. App. 49 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1878)