Reed v. Reed

Michigan Supreme Court

Reed v. Reed

49 N.W. 587, 86 Mich. 600, 1891 Mich. LEXIS 981

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 28, 1891

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 49 N.W. 587 (Reed v. Reed) 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

Reed v. Reed, 49 N.W. 587, 86 Mich. 600, 1891 Mich. LEXIS 981 (Mich. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Grant, J.

Complainant obtained a decree of divorce from defendant on the ground of extreme cruelty. Defendant appeals, claiming—

1. That the decree should be reversed for lack of evidence that the parties were not acting in collusion.

2. That too large an amount was decreed for alimony.

We think the proof sufficient to show that there was no collusion between the parties.

The court decreed alimony in the sum of $2,000, the same to be -in full satisfaction of complainant’s claim to dower, if the amount was paid or secured within 60 days. The proofs show that about the time the bill was filed the defendant was the owner of several parcels of land of considerable value; that he was also possessed of considerable personal property, and of an interest in his father’s estate worth at least $7,000.- We think the award of alimony by the court was very reasonable, under the circumstances and situation of the parties.

The defendant attempted to show the transfer of the most of his property to his brother. It is evident that these transfers were not in good faith.

The decree is affirmed, with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Grant, J.

Complainant obtained a decree of divorce from defendant on the ground of extreme cruelty. Defendant appeals, claiming—

1. That the decree should be reversed for lack of evidence that the parties were not acting in collusion.

2. That too large an amount was decreed for alimony.

We think the proof sufficient to show that there was no collusion between the parties.

The court decreed alimony in the sum of $2,000, the same to be -in full satisfaction of complainant’s claim to dower, if the amount was paid or secured within 60 days. The proofs show that about the time the bill was filed the defendant was the owner of several parcels of land of considerable value; that he was also possessed of considerable personal property, and of an interest in his father’s estate worth at least $7,000.- We think the award of alimony by the court was very reasonable, under the circumstances and situation of the parties.

The defendant attempted to show the transfer of the most of his property to his brother. It is evident that these transfers were not in good faith.

The decree is affirmed, with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 N.W. 587, 86 Mich. 600, 1891 Mich. LEXIS 981, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reed-v-reed-mich-1891.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack