Case Name: DOWNING v. DOWNING
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1923-06-20
Citations: 1 Ohio Law Abs. 582
Docket Number: 
Parties: DOWNING v. DOWNING
Judges: 
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 1
Pages: 582–582

Head Matter:
No. 612
DOWNING v. DOWNING
Ohio Appeals, Second District, Franklin County
Decided June 20, 1923
This opinion has not been published- except in Abstract.
ALIMONY — Court may grant alimony under prayer for “such other and further relief.”
Attorneys — T. H. Hennesey, for H. Downing; J. H. Horst, for L. Downing.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Epitomized Opinion
H. Downing alleged gross neglect of duty and prayed for divorce, restoration of maiden name and such other further relief as she may be entitle*! to., Her husband, L. Downing, was personally served.1, but made default. The trial court rendered her a decree of divorce and allowed alimony. He moved to set aside judgment for alimony on the ground no demand had been made therefor in the petition. The motion was granted. This was assigned as error. The Court of Appeals in reversing the judgment and overruling the motion to set aside the decree for alimony held:
I. Alimony is an incident to the divorce and a claim therefor need not be pleaded if the divorce is granted. 62 OS. 90.
Dicta: Even if the motion to set aside judgment for alimony was predicated on doctrine that no showing was made, that defendant owned property, still the court would have no right to grant it. 99 OS. 143.