Seelye v. Seelye

Illinois Supreme Court

Seelye v. Seelye

32 N.E. 427, 143 Ill. 264

CourtIllinois Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 31, 1892

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 32 N.E. 427 (Seelye v. Seelye) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Seelye v. Seelye, 32 N.E. 427, 143 Ill. 264 (Ill. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam :

This is a proceeding, under the statute, to recover separate maintenance. The amount decreed to be paid' is less then $1000, and the facts are precisely the same as they were in Umlauf v. Umlauf, 103 Ill. 651. Eor the reasons given in that case the appeal must be dismissed. In Jenkins v. Jenkins, 104 Ill. 134, and in Johnson v. Johnson, 125 id. 510, the question of jurisdiction was not called to the attention of the court, and no decision was made in either of those cases in that respect.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Per Curiam :

This is a proceeding, under the statute, to recover separate maintenance. The amount decreed to be paid' is less then $1000, and the facts are precisely the same as they were in Umlauf v. Umlauf, 103 Ill. 651. Eor the reasons given in that case the appeal must be dismissed. In Jenkins v. Jenkins, 104 Ill. 134, and in Johnson v. Johnson, 125 id. 510, the question of jurisdiction was not called to the attention of the court, and no decision was made in either of those cases in that respect.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 N.E. 427, 143 Ill. 264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seelye-v-seelye-ill-1892.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack