McNees v. McNees

30 S.W. 207, 97 Ky. 152, 1895 Ky. LEXIS 166
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedMarch 20, 1895
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 30 S.W. 207 (McNees v. McNees) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
McNees v. McNees, 30 S.W. 207, 97 Ky. 152, 1895 Ky. LEXIS 166 (Ky. Ct. App. 1895).

Opinion

JUDGE GUFFY

delivered the opinion oe tiie court.

In 1882 the appellant, by judgment of the Kenton Chancery Court, obtained a divorce from the appellee and was also adjudged the care, custody and control of their minor son, Wilmot McNees. In 1891 the appellant instituted this suit in the Harrison Circuit Court seeking to obtain judg: ment against the appellee for fifteen hundred dollars for care, expenses, etc., in raising and caring for said son.

The defendant demurred to the jurisdiction of the court but the same was overruled, as was also a general demurrer, and the cause was prepared for trial, and upon the hearing the court dismissed the petition of plaintiff and she has appealed to this court.

It is not necessary to decide any of the questions of law or fact made in this case except the demurrer to the jurisdiction of the Harrison Circuit Court. Section 7 of article 3, chapter 52 of the General Statutes provides in substance that pending an application for divorce or on final hearing the court may make orders for the care and maintenance of the minor children, and at any time afterwards, upon the petition of either parent, revise and alter the same. It seems to us the Kenton Chancery Court was the court to apply to for relief if appellant was entitled to any further judgment or order in regard to the maintenance of the child. Many good reasons might be assigned in support of the wisdom [154]*154and propriety of the law vesting tbe control of such matters in the court rendering the judgment of divorce, but it is not necessary to do so now. It follows from the foregoing that the demurrer to the jurisdiction of the Harrison Circuit Court should have been sustained and that the petition ought to have been dismissed.

The judgment is therefore affirmed.

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

Related

Shumaker v. Paxton
613 S.W.2d 130 (Kentucky Supreme Court, 1981)
Weightman v. Hamilton
261 S.W.2d 680 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1953)
Gothard v. Lewis
29 S.W.2d 590 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1930)
Parks v. Parks
272 S.W. 419 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1925)
State ex rel. Wookey v. Elifritz
160 N.W. 113 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1916)
Alvey v. Hartwig
11 L.R.A.N.S. 678 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1907)
Dunn v. Commonwealth
49 S.W. 813 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
30 S.W. 207, 97 Ky. 152, 1895 Ky. LEXIS 166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcnees-v-mcnees-kyctapp-1895.