The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1897-01-17
NEW DANGERS FOR
DIVORCED PEOPLE
Judge Belcher's Latest De-
cision May Cause
Trouble.
Decree of Legal Separation May
Decree of Legal Separation May
Be Set Aside at Any Time
by the Court.
Mrs. Josephine Dastague Surprised to
Learn That She Is Still in the
Bonds of Wedlock.

Mrs. Josephine Dastague is not yet di-
vorced from Roman Dastague. although
for several weeks she thought herself free
from the CALLING bonds of wedlock.
Dastague failed to answer his wife's COM
plant in the time allowed by law and
Judge Sanderson, who was then on the
bench, ordered his default to be entered as
is usual in such cases. Subsequently q
decree of divorce was granted, the iudg-
ment entered and the judgment roll was
made up.
When Dastague heard a decree had been
entered against him with the attendant
danger of alimony, he employed Attorney
Rossi to represent HIM, and that gentle
man convinced Judge Sanderson that the
defendant ought to have hearing, so an
order was made setting aside the decree of
divorce Judge Belcher, who succeed ed
Judge Sanderson, afterward set aside the
default and put the case on the calendar
to be heard on its merits.
Attorney Ruef objected to this proceed
ing. He said that his client, Mrs.
Dastague, had been granted divorce in
the regular way, and that the court had
no right or power to set aside the judg-
ment unless showing is made in writing
that there was inadvertence, surprise or
excusabIe neglect on the part of the de-
fendant, or unless motion for new trial
has been properly made, with notice
served on the opposite party. In this
case, he said, the judgment and default
had been set aside without notice to him
or his client, and he thought the court
had exceeded its Jurisdiction.
The court is not with you in regard to
that matter" replied Judge Belcher.
Section ATS OF the Code of Civil Procedure
seems to govern in case like tnIs. It is a
proceeding to determine the status of
persons. A divorce suit Is quasi a pro-
ceeding in rem, and the court has juris-
diction to set aside this judgment of its
own motion or on the showing of either
party"
Mrs. Dastague will therefore be COM
PEELED to go into court with her witnesses
again, and her husband will be there to
tell his side of the story in regard to their
domestic infelicities unless Judge Bel
chers decision Is overruled by the Su-
preme Court.
Mr. Ruef entered an exception prepara-
tory to taking an appeal to the Supreme
Court. He suggested that if this rule
should apply to all divorce cases of this
character it would render such litigation
exceedingly uncertain and extremely per-
picking.
Ii the lady so divorced should at once
remarry it would com plicate family mat
tiers TO distressing degree to have the old
decree set aside In the midst OF the second
honeymoon, for instance, and to call on
the newly made wife of the second mar
riage to appear again in court in litigation
that s had considered finally settled and
disposed of forever. While it might not
morally involve her in the charge of big
amy it would technically place her IN :he
position of having two husbands, and she
would have no lawful right to live with
the second until the marital bombs hold
ing her to the first had been iudicially
severed. Worse than that, she would have
to face to possibility of defeat in her Sec
ond tr al for divorce. and this might mean
an interruption if not termination of
her new-found happiness.
Following out Judge Becher's decision
to its legitimatr conclusion it would seem
to be risky thing to marry divorced
person while his or her spouse is living,
for If the decree may BE set aside at any
time after the divorce there is no telling
when the cid litigation may come up to
vex the new-made family. This is illus