Vine v. Vine

42 A. 871, 21 R.I. 190, 1899 R.I. LEXIS 23
Supreme Court of Rhode Island·Decided February 10, 1899·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

^ By Gen. Laws R. I. cap. 222, § 4, cap. 195, § 14, exclusive jurisdiction in divorce and incidental matters arising therein is vested in the Appellate Division of this court. We are of the opinion, therefore, that no action can be .maintained in any other court to recover an allowance made to a wife for her support during the pendency of the petition for divorce, but that recourse must be had to the remedies prescribed by the rule of this Division.

*191 Dennis J. Holland, for plaintiff. Franklin P. Oiuen and John P. Beagan, for defendant.

Moreover, a decree for an allowance penclente lite is an interlocutory decree, subject to revocation or modification at any time by tbe court which made it, and consequently cannot be the foundation of an action as upon a final judgment. i Wait’s Actions and Defences, 187, § 5.

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

Vine v. Vine, 42 A. 871, 21 R.I. 190, 1899 R.I. LEXIS 23 (R.I. 1899).

42 A. 871 (Vine v. Vine) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Van Horn v. Van Horn
93 P. 670 (Washington Supreme Court, 1908)