Glinsmann v. Glinsmann

Headnote

A decree for divorce on the ground offeree or fraud cannot be granted, where it appears “ that, at any time before the commencement of the suit, there was a voluntary cohabitation of the parties as husband and wife.” (2 R. S. 143, § 32.)

{Quere ? Whether, to meet the requirements of justice in many cases, this statute does not need amendment, if the voluntary cohabitation mentioned, does not mean a knowledge of the fraud.)

In this case, it would seem that the parties did not live together after the alleged fraud was discovered; and that the suit was thereafter immediately commenced.

Application for a decree dissolving marriage contract for fraud.

The plaintiff and defendant intermarried in December, 1847, and, as husband and wife, lived together until August, 1854. During this period they have had two children, one of whom is now living. The plaintiff asks for a decree dissolving the marriage contract upon the ground of fraud.

•The alleged fraud consists in the defendant’s having, prior to the marriage, and as an inducement to plaintiff to contract it, represented herself as a chaste woman, when, in fact, she was the mother of four illegitimate children; that she concealed such fact fj-om the plaintiff prior to the marriage, and that he only discovered it in August, 1854.