Morgan v. Lowman

80 Ill. App. 557, 1898 Ill. App. LEXIS 466
CourtAppellate Court of Illinois
DecidedFebruary 7, 1899
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 80 Ill. App. 557 (Morgan v. Lowman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Morgan v. Lowman, 80 Ill. App. 557, 1898 Ill. App. LEXIS 466 (Ill. Ct. App. 1899).

Opinion

Mr. J üstioe Harker

delivered the opinion of the court.

On the 16th of June, 1891, the Circuit Court of Logan County granted appellant a divorce from appellee, and by the terms of thg decree required him to pay to her alimony at the rate of $120 per year, payable quarterly. On the 29th of September, 1892, she remarried one James Morgan, who has since then supported her. Flo part of the alimony having been paid, appellant commenced proceedings by scire facias to revive the decree and compel appellee to pay $850, then claimed to be due under it. Appellee filed a plea setting ,up that he was released from the terms of the decree by the remarriage of appellant. Upon a hearing the court held she was entitled to alimony to the date of her remarriage and revived the decree to that extent, but held that she was barred from alimony thereafter.

Where a divorced wife remarries, the divorced husband is absolved from the burdens of a decree requiring him to pay alimony. She has a vested right only in that which has accrued up to the date of. the second marriage. It is her privilege to abandon the provision which the decree of the court makes for her support by entering into marriage with another man, thereby seeking her support from another direction, but when she does so the law will require her to abide her election. Stillman v. Stillman, 99 Ill. 196; Storey v. Storey et al., 125 Ill. 608; Albee v. Wyman, 10 Gray, 222; Bowman v. Worthington, 24 Ark. 522.

We think the court had full power to revise the decree in the proceeding to revive by scire facias, and it was not indispensable that the party against whom the decree was rendered should have himself instituted proceedings for that purpose. Decree affirmed.

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

Related

In Re Marriage of Stanley
479 N.E.2d 1152 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1985)
Bridges v. Bridges
217 So. 2d 281 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1968)
Austad v. Austad
269 P.2d 284 (Utah Supreme Court, 1954)
Hotzfield v. Hotzfield
83 N.E.2d 605 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1948)
Banck v. Banck
54 N.E.2d 577 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1944)
Alsop v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
92 F.2d 148 (Third Circuit, 1937)
Phy v. Phy
240 P. 237 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1925)
Thompson v. Mentzer
216 Ill. App. 470 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1920)
Hartigan v. Hartigan
171 N.W. 925 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1919)
Narregang v. Narregang
139 N.W. 341 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1913)
Brandt v. Brandt
67 P. 508 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1902)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
80 Ill. App. 557, 1898 Ill. App. LEXIS 466, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morgan-v-lowman-illappct-1899.