Case Name: Ludlow R. Stevens, petitioner-respondent, v. Marjorie G. Stevens, defendant-appellant; Marjorie G. Stevens, defendant-appellant, v. Ludlow R. Stevens, petitioner-respondent
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1925-01-19
Citations: 97 N.J. Eq. 351
Docket Number: 
Parties: Ludlow R. Stevens, petitioner-respondent, v. Marjorie G. Stevens, defendant-appellant. Marjorie G. Stevens, defendant-appellant, v. Ludlow R. Stevens, petitioner-respondent.
Judges: For affirmance—The Chiee-Justice, Teen chard, Parker, Mintuen, Black, Katzenbach, Campbell, Lloyd, White, Gardnee, Van Buskirk, Clark, McGlennon, Kays, JJ. 14.
Reporter: New Jersey Equity Reports
Volume: 97
Pages: 351–355

Head Matter:
Ludlow R. Stevens, petitioner-respondent, v. Marjorie G. Stevens, defendant-appellant. Marjorie G. Stevens, defendant-appellant, v. Ludlow R. Stevens, petitioner-respondent.
[Decided January 19th, 1925.]
Mr. Merritt Lane, for Ludlow R. Stevens.
Mr. Jacob L. Newman, for Marjorie G. Stevens.

Opinion:
Per Ctjriam.
The appeal in the first of these cases brings up for review a decree of divorce in a suit brought by the husband against Ms wife for an alleged adultery. The decree in the second litigation was entered in a suit brought by the wife against the husband for maintenance: The cases were heard together and resulted in a decree in favor of the husband both in the divorce case and in the maintenance suit.
Each of these decrees will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion of the learned vice-chancellor filed in the court of chancery.
An application was made by counsel for the wife, Marjorie G. Stevens, for a counsel fee to be awarded for services rendered on the appeals. We think the application should be denied, and it will be so ordered.*
For affirmance—The Chiee-Justice, Teen chard, Parker, Mintuen, Black, Katzenbach, Campbell, Lloyd, White, Gardnee, Van Buskirk, Clark, McGlennon, Kays, JJ. 14.
For reversal—None.