Simons v. Simons

10 N.W. 360, 47 Mich. 253, 1881 Mich. LEXIS 477
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided October 27, 1881·Published·Cited by 19 cases

Opinion

Mansion, C. J".

This is an appeal by the complainant from the decree dismissing the bill, which was filed to set aside a previous decree of divorce granted upon the complaint of this complainant, and which she now alleges was procured by collusion with her husband, the defendant. In the bill first filed and upon which the decree was granted she alleged that the acts done as therein set forth, “ were committed without the consent, connivance, privity or procurement of your oratrix, and that such bill is not founded on, or exhibited in consequence of any collusion, agreement or understanding whatever, between the parties thereto or between your oratrix or any other person,” — and this was sworn to. Without this sworn allegation in her bill of complaint it would not have been entertained, and she having thereby given the court jurisdiction and permitted the case to proceed to a final decree, she cannot now be permitted to take advantage of her own wrong and show that there was [254] collusion between berself and husband in that case. She was not misled or defrauded therein but understood well what was being done, and that her husband consented. Indeed, the whole matter was simply a shameless bargain, and whether right or wrong she must now abide by it.

The decree dismissing the bill will be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Simons v. Simons, 10 N.W. 360, 47 Mich. 253, 1881 Mich. LEXIS 477 (Mich. 1881).

10 N.W. 360 (Simons v. Simons) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Shapiro v. Shapiro
190 So. 2d 548 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1966)
Kull v. Losch
44 N.W.2d 169 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1950)
Zirkalos v. Zirkalos
40 N.W.2d 313 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1949)
Miller v. Miller
38 N.W.2d 35 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1949)
Robson v. Kramer
245 N.W. 341 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1932)
Alderdyce v. Alderdyce
221 N.W. 153 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1928)
Fairclough v. St. Amand
114 So. 472 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1927)
McGraw v. McGraw
138 A. 183 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1927)
Hall v. Hall
112 So. 622 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
Bancroft v. Bancroft
173 P. 579 (California Supreme Court, 1918)
Van Slyke v. Van Slyke
152 N.W. 921 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1915)
Robinson v. Robinson
138 P. 288 (Washington Supreme Court, 1914)
Breen v. Breen
123 N.W. 1106 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1909)
Karren v. Karren
60 L.R.A. 294 (Utah Supreme Court, 1902)
Brigham
57 N.E. 328 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1900)
Dow v. Blake
35 N.E. 761 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1893)
Hubbard v. Hubbard
19 Colo. 13 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1893)
Carlisle v. Carlisle
55 N.W. 673 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1893)
Orth v. Orth
37 N.W. 67 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1888)