Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

50 Mich. 293

Johnson v. Johnson

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 11, 1883

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1883-04-11

<p>Divorce — Delay in filing cross-Mil.</p> <p>A wife’s delay to file a bill for divorce until after her husband has filed one is not of itself a reason for refusing her relief where the husband’s offence has not been forgiven and the parties have lived apart since it was committed.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Divorce granted · Decided 1883-04-11

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently March 1986

3 state decisions

1018831890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 →

Cooley, J.

¶1These are cross-suits for divorce. The cause assigned in each, bill is adultery. ¥e think-the husband has wholly failed to make out a case, but that the allegations' of the wife are established.

¶2It is suggested, however, that the wife’s complaint should not be listened to with favor, because she was not prompt in making it, and did not file her bill until after he had commenced suit. We-domot agree in this Delay in complaining of family difficulties is to be encouraged rather than punished, in the hope that a better state of things may be established by the voluntary action of the parties. No forgiveness of the offense is pretended in this case, and the parties have been living apart since it was committed. A decree of divorce in the wife’s favor will be entered, and she will have judgment for costs of both cases in this Court,, with a solicitor’s fee of $50 in each.

The other Justices concurred.
/50/mich/293 · .json · Public domain