Case Name: Stafford v. Stafford
Court: Supreme Court of Indiana
Jurisdiction: Indiana
Decision Date: 1857-05-29
Citations: 9 Ind. 162
Docket Number: 
Parties: Stafford v. Stafford.
Judges: 
Reporter: Indiana Reports
Volume: 9
Pages: 162–163

Head Matter:
Stafford v. Stafford.
Bill by the wife for divorce and alimony. Cross-bill by the husband. Decree dismissing the bill, granting the husband a divorce, and allowing tho wife alimony. Quœre, whether, under our statute, alimony could be decreed to the wife, after her bill was dismissed.
Friday, May 29.
APPEAL from the Morgan Circuit Court.
Elizabeth Stafford filed her petition in the Morgan Circuit Court for a divorce, on the ground of abandonment and cruel treatment. At the May term, 1854, of that Court, the defendant, Benjamin Stafford, filed an answer denying the averments in the petition, and a cross-petition praying a divorce on the ground of refusal to cohabit, abandonment, ill treatment of his children, and the impossibility of a reconciliation. Mrs. Stafford answered the cross-petition, denying its allegations, and setting up some new matter; and the appellant replied, denying that new matter.
There was a jury trial of the issues. The verdict was, “We, the jury, find for the defendant.”
On this verdict the Court below rendered a final decree, dismissing Mrs. Stafford’s petition, granting a divorce in favor of the appellant, and decreeing to the appellee 200 dollars for her alimony.
From this decree touching alimony, Benjamin Stafford appeals; and he assigns the allowance of alimony as the only error on which he relies. Both parties, it seems, are satisfied with the decree of divorce.
D. M'Donald and W. R. Harrison, for the appellant.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Whether it was erroneous to decree alimony to the wife after her bill was dismissed, we leave in dubio, upon the construction of the nineteenth section of the act concerning divorces, 2 R. S. p. 237. The error, if any, is beyond our reach. The evidence is not on the record. There was no motion for a new trial, and no objection or exception in any form taken to the ruling of the Circuit Court. See Gimbel v. Smidth, 7 Ind. R. 627.
The judgment is affirmed, with 3 per cent, damages and costs.