Mattson v. Mattson

97 A. 40, 85 N.J. Eq. 454, 1915 N.J. Ch. LEXIS 1
New Jersey Court of Chancery·Decided December 31, 1915·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Grieein, Y. C.

A decree nisi in favor of the petitioner against the defendant in the above cause was signed June 6th, 1913, in an action for divorce on the ground of desertion. Since that time the petitioner has declined to enter the decree absolute in her favor; whereupon the defendant’s solicitor gave notice of a motion to compel the petitioner “either' to take a final decree or else to discontinue the above-entitled action.” More than two years have elapsed since the petitioner became entitled to enter her absolute decree upon the decree nisi.

I will advise an order that the decree nisi be opened and the petition dismissed, unless within thirty days from the date of the order the petitioner enters her decree absolute. Lewis v. Lewis (1892), L. R. P. & D. Div. 212; Boddington v. Boddington (1881), L. R. 6 P. & D. Div. 13; Ousey v. Ousey (1875-6), L. R. 1 P. & D. Div. 58.

Counsel may present an order in accordance with the ’above views at the chancery chambers, in the city of Jersey City, on Monday, January 3d next.

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

Mattson v. Mattson, 97 A. 40, 85 N.J. Eq. 454, 1915 N.J. Ch. LEXIS 1 (N.J. Ct. App. 1915).

97 A. 40 (Mattson v. Mattson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Loeb v. Loeb
215 A.2d 779 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1965)
Iovino v. Iovino
155 A.2d 578 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1959)