Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

21 Mich. 414

Zeigenfuss v. Zeigenfuss

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 6, 1870

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1870-10-06

<p>Practice in the Supreme Court: Alimony. Alimony is not a matter of course in the Supreme Court. When the wife was complainant below, and she appeals, there must be a satisfactory showing of the reasonableness and good faith of the appeal, and that the granting of alimony will be necessary to prevent a failure of justice, and the wife from suffering, to justify its allowance.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1870-10-06

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently June 1913

5 state decisions

2018701880189019001910decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1Complainant filed her bill for divorce against defendant, David Zeigenfuss, for ill treatment, and the bill was dis*415missed in the Court below, and she has appealed. She now asks for alimony pendente lite, and for an allowance, on petition showing her want of means and her husband’s condition as to property. Oontra affidavits were presented. There was no affidavit or other showing that the appeal was brought in good faith, and for reasonable cause.

¶2It seems to have been supposed that alimony is a matter of course in this Court. This is not so. When the wife appeals we always require some proof of the reasonableness and good faith of the appeal, and also proof that it is necessary to grant alimony against the husband to prevent a failure of justice and to save the wife from suffering. And when the wife was the moving party in the commencement of the suit, and has had her bill dismissed, the showing must be very satisfactory.

¶3In this case there is no showing whatever as to the good faith or propriety of the appeal, and upon the question of necessity the facts are not sufficient. It appears that the husband is poor and not able to furnish any considerable amount for alimony, and that the wife’s friends are well off and not indisposed to aid her. We do not think there will be any great danger of a failure of justice by reason of the denial of alimony; and we deny the application, but without costs.

/21/mich/414 · .json · Public domain