Hennessy

Hennessy v. Nicol

Caution
105 Cal. 138·1894 Cal. LEXIS 1126·38 P. 649
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 20, 1894No. 15870California1,262 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Belcher, J.

This is an application for a writ of mandate commanding the respondent, as judge of the superior court of Tuolumne county, to hear and determine a motion made in an action pending in his court for a change of the place of trial of said action.

The facts upon which the application is based are as follows: On June 1, 1894, Cornelia Hennessy commenced an action in the superior court of Tuolumne county against John C. Hennessy, the petitioner here, alleging that the parties to the action were married on July 4, 1889, in said county, and had ever since been, and still were, husband and wife; that from the time of their marriage they continued to live and cohabit together as husband and wife in this state until June 21, 1891, when the defendant willfully and without cause deserted the plaintiff, and had ever since refused to live with her, or to provide a home for her, or to allow her .to return to him; that in November, 1891, a son, the issue of the marriage, was born, and that since the said separation the defendant had refused and neglected to pay or contribute any thing towards the support of *140 plaintiff or the said child; that defendant had an income sufficient to pay plaintiff…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.