Williams v. Williams

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Williams v. Williams

55 S.E.2d 195, 230 N.C. 660, 1949 N.C. LEXIS 420

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 28, 1949

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 55 S.E.2d 195 (Williams v. Williams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Williams v. Williams, 55 S.E.2d 195, 230 N.C. 660, 1949 N.C. LEXIS 420 (N.C. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

EbviN, J.

The defendant expressly pleaded the adultery of the plaintiff in bar of her claim to alimony and offered testimony in support of his plea. In consequence, the order of the court awarding temporary alimony to the plaintiff without finding the facts with respect to this plea ignores the provision of the statute regulating independent suits for alimony without divorce, which was adopted in 1923 and which reads as follows: “In all applications for alimony under this section it shall be competent for the husband to plead the adultery of the wife in bar of her right to such alimony, and if the wife shall deny such plea, and the issue be found against her by the judge, he shall make no order allowing her any sum whatever as alimony, or for her support, but only her reasonable counsel fees.” G.S. 50-16. The action of the court in awarding temporary alimony to plaintiff without making any determination as to the *661 validity of tbe defendant’s plea constitutes error entitling defendant to a rebearing upon tbe application. Phillips v. Phillips, 223 N.C. 276, 25 S.E. 2d 848; Holloway v. Holloway, 214 N.C. 662, 200 S.E. 436; Price v. Price, 188 N.C. 640, 125 S.E. 264.

Error.

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

EbviN, J.

The defendant expressly pleaded the adultery of the plaintiff in bar of her claim to alimony and offered testimony in support of his plea. In consequence, the order of the court awarding temporary alimony to the plaintiff without finding the facts with respect to this plea ignores the provision of the statute regulating independent suits for alimony without divorce, which was adopted in 1923 and which reads as follows: “In all applications for alimony under this section it shall be competent for the husband to plead the adultery of the wife in bar of her right to such alimony, and if the wife shall deny such plea, and the issue be found against her by the judge, he shall make no order allowing her any sum whatever as alimony, or for her support, but only her reasonable counsel fees.” G.S. 50-16. The action of the court in awarding temporary alimony to plaintiff without making any determination as to the *661 validity of tbe defendant’s plea constitutes error entitling defendant to a rebearing upon tbe application. Phillips v. Phillips, 223 N.C. 276, 25 S.E. 2d 848; Holloway v. Holloway, 214 N.C. 662, 200 S.E. 436; Price v. Price, 188 N.C. 640, 125 S.E. 264.

Error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 S.E.2d 195, 230 N.C. 660, 1949 N.C. LEXIS 420, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-williams-nc-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack