STREITWOLF
v.
STREITWOLF
Mr. Justice Geat,
after stating the case as above, delivered the opinion of the court.
This case must follow Bell v. Bell, ante, 175. The law of North Dakota requires a domicil in good faith of the libellant for ninety days as a prerequisite to jurisdiction of a case of divorce. Smith v. Smith, 7 North Dakota, 404, 413. The facts in evidence warranted, and indeed required, the finding that the husband had no Iona fide domicil in the State of North Dakota, when he obtained a divorce there, and it is not pretended that the wife had an independent domicil in North Dakota, or was ever in that State. The court of that State, therefore, had no jurisdiction.
Judgment affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Williams v. North Carolina, 325 U.S. 226 (U.S. 1945)…t think the federal courts can, by their mere label, attach jurisdictional consequences to the state’s requirement of domicile. Hence, I think the quoted statement from the Magnolia Petroleum case should control this case. Streitwolf v. Streitwolf, 181 U. S. 179, decided the same day as Bell v. Bell, held a North Dakota divorce decree invalid. That holding did not rest on any “federal concept of domicile,” but on the fact that North Dakota law required “a domicile in good faith . . . for ninety days as a pr…1 / 2
-
Haddock v. Haddock, 201 U.S. 562 (U.S. 1906)…tituting proceedings, the decree is open to a collateral attack, Bell v. Bell, 181 U. S. 175, and a recital in the proceedings of a fact necessary to show jurisdiction may be contradicted. Thompson v. Whitman, 18 Wall. 457; Streitwolf v. Streitwolf, 181 U. S. 179; Andrews v. Andrews, 188 U. S. 14. Subject to these conditions, each State has the right to regulate the marital status of its citizens, at' least so far as to determine in what manner and by whom marriages may be solemnized, what shall be deemed t…1 / 2
-
Andrews v. Andrews, 188 U.S. 14 (U.S. 1903)…blic policy of that State as expressed in its statutes. Indeed, this application of the general principle is not open to dispute, since it has been directly sustained by decisions of this court. Bell v. Bell, 181 U. S. 175; Streitwolf v. Streitwolf, 181 U. S. 179. In each of these cases it was sought in one State to enforce a decree of divorce rendered in another State, and the authority of the due faith and credit clause of the Constitution was invoked for that purpose. It having been established in each ca…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence