Hite

Hite v. Hite

Good Law
1898 Cal. LEXIS 1081·6 Cal. Unrep. 216·55 P. 900
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 31, 1898S. F. No. 1489California1,052 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Garoutte, J.

In the pending action for divorce the trial court made an order for alimony and counsel fees. *217 This appeal is now prosecuted by defendant from that order. The answer of defendant denies the fact of marriage, and it is now insisted upon his part that the evidence taken at the hearing does not justify the order. It is thus apparent that the question directly confronts us, What amount of evidence is necessary to justify the trial court in awarding alimony and counsel fees in a pending action for divorce, where the existence of the marriage relation is denied? Yet, in view of the future trial of this ease upon its merits, where this question will undoubtedly be the all-important question to be tried and decided, we feel that the discussion of the matter upon an appeal from the preliminary order should be circumscribed within small limits. Any other course might result in embarrassment to both parties at the trial of the cause, and therefore its discussion will serve no good purpose at the present time.

There must be some evidence tending to show a marriage relation between the parties before an order similar to the one at bar should be made. It is perfectly evident that the…

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.