Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

GLADYS NIGHTINGALE, Petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE CITY AND COUNTYOF SAN FRANCISCO et al., Respondents.

THE COURT.

We entertain no doubt of the power of the court in divorce actions to modify its orders for the payment to the wife of money necessary to enable her to support herself during the pendency of the action, or to enable her to prosecute or defend the action, as the circumstances with regard to necessity change. As to orders for the payment of money for support there has never been any question in this behalf, and there is no difference in principle with relation to money to be paid to her for the purpose of enabling her to pay attorneys. The superior court did not exceed its jurisdiction in this matter.

The application for a writ of certiorari is denied.

Angellotti, C. J., Lennon, J., Wilbur, J., Sloane, J., Lawlor, J., and Olney, J., concurred.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

NIGHTINGALE v. SUPERIOR COURT
(Dec 28, 1920)