Saunders v. Saunders

New York Court of Chancery

Saunders v. Saunders

2 Edw. Ch. 491, 1835 N.Y. LEXIS 246, 1835 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 35

DecidedSeptember 14, 1835

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Edw. Ch. 491 (Saunders v. Saunders) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Saunders v. Saunders, 2 Edw. Ch. 491, 1835 N.Y. LEXIS 246, 1835 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 35 (N.Y. 1835).

Pincite

Opinion

The Vice-Chancellor:

The bill charges ill-treatment, by turning the wife out of doors. It appears that the husband caused a notice to be served upon the wife warning her not to enter his house. These parties have brought up a family; and nothing appears to have occurred for some' years. But now the wife, who files the bill, has become grossly intemperate—is a common drunkard. This plainly appears from the opposing affidavits. I do not consider it correct, on the part of the husband, to have served the notice he has done. Still, I cannot overlook the drunkenness of the wife. It may not be safe to entrust her with money for board, because she may apply it to a very different purpose ; and it may be that the two dollars a week allowed by the husband is sufficient tinder the circumstances.

[492]*492Let a reference be had to Master Cambreleng, to ascertain whether two dollars a week is a suitable allowance or what sum is proper to be advanced for the support of the complainant pending this suit; and whether she is tit to be entrusted with the money and would be likely to make a proper use of it for her support. All further directions—including the question of an advance to her solicitor—are reserved until the coming in of the report.

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

The Vice-Chancellor:

The bill charges ill-treatment, by turning the wife out of doors. It appears that the husband caused a notice to be served upon the wife warning her not to enter his house. These parties have brought up a family; and nothing appears to have occurred for some' years. But now the wife, who files the bill, has become grossly intemperate—is a common drunkard. This plainly appears from the opposing affidavits. I do not consider it correct, on the part of the husband, to have served the notice he has done. Still, I cannot overlook the drunkenness of the wife. It may not be safe to entrust her with money for board, because she may apply it to a very different purpose ; and it may be that the two dollars a week allowed by the husband is sufficient tinder the circumstances.

[492]*492Let a reference be had to Master Cambreleng, to ascertain whether two dollars a week is a suitable allowance or what sum is proper to be advanced for the support of the complainant pending this suit; and whether she is tit to be entrusted with the money and would be likely to make a proper use of it for her support. All further directions—including the question of an advance to her solicitor—are reserved until the coming in of the report.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Edw. Ch. 491, 1835 N.Y. LEXIS 246, 1835 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 35, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saunders-v-saunders-nychanct-1835.