Case ID: mich_164/html/0511-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Blair, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

DES CHAMPLAIN v. DES CHAMPLAIN.
    Divorce — Alimony—Pro Confesso Decree — Appeal—Rehearing.
    On appeal from the amount of alimony awarded by a pro confesso decree of divorce, which gave the wife substantially all of defendant’s property, and which might have been affected by statements of counsel on the hearing to the effect that defendant was willing that complainant should have the property, the cause is remanded for rehearing as to the amount.
    Appeal from Delta; Stone, J.
    Submitted January 6, 1911.
    (Docket No. 32.)
    Decided February 1, 1911.
    
      Bill by Philomene Des Champlain against Odelin Des Champlain for divorce. From a decree pro confesso awarding complainant alimony, defendant appeals.
    Remanded for rehearing as to amount of alimony.
    
      John Power, for complainant.
    
      A. H. Ryall, for defendant.
   Blair, J.

This is an appeal from a pro .confesso decree of divorce; a petition for rehearing having been, denied by the circuit judge. The only point made in this court is that the award of alimony was excessive.

It appears from the record that the home and household furniture awarded to complainant comprise substantially all of the property of defendant, and that the circuit judge may have been influenced in making the award by statements of counsel, doubtless made in perfect good faith, that the officer who served the subpoena reported to him that ‘ ‘ if she wanted to get his house she was welcome to it.” We deem this to be a proper case to apply the practice adopted in Ferguson v. Ferguson, 145 Mich. 290 (108 N. W. 682).

The decree is affirmed, except as to the award of alimony, and the case is remanded for a rehearing upon that subject, with costs to complainant.

Ostrander, O. J., and Bird, Hooker, and Brooke, JJ., concurred.