Leading Cases of the Court of Civil Appeals of the State of Tennessee, with Syllabi and Notes (Volume 5); With Syllabi and Notes
Paperback
Currently unavailable to order
ISBN10: 1155120523
ISBN13: 9781155120522
Publisher: General Books
Pages: 216
Weight: 0.87
Height: 0.46 Width: 7.44 Depth: 9.69
Language: English
ISBN13: 9781155120522
Publisher: General Books
Pages: 216
Weight: 0.87
Height: 0.46 Width: 7.44 Depth: 9.69
Language: English
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1915. Excerpt: ... Gallagher v. Iron Co. a decree thus obtained be adjudged void if the fraud practiced appertain to jurisdiction either of complainant or defendant. In the instant case there was a fraudulent and deliberate effort upon the part of Gallagher to make it appear that his wife had disappeared so that personal service of process could not be had upon her. This was done by him when he knew that his wife was at the home of her mother with her little child, awaiting his summons to return to him, and when he knew that this averment and his testimony that she had deserted him and disappeared with a paramour were without foundation. We have no hesitancy in saying that the decree of the Chancellor was warranted by the facts. No authorities are needed to sustain the proposition that a decree of divorce obtained by fraud may be collaterally attacked, and that this may be done by the defendant, even after the death of the party who sought the decree. And this relief may be sought against any party who is asserting that he or she is the surviving spouse of the one who sought the divorce. This has been held so often that citation of authorities is useless. We refer, however, to an opinion rendered by this Court through Justice Wilson at the May, 1911, term at Knoxvilie, in the case of Melnicave v. Melnicove, from the Chancery Court of Hamilton County. We are also of the opinion that the Circuit Court of Roane County never obtained jurisdiction of the person of complainant, and for that reason the decree of divorce was void. In the caption of the bill for divorce it is stated that the residence of complainant was unknown. In the body of the bill it is averred in substance that complainant had left her husband, and he supposed that she went to her people in Loudon County, but ...
