Case Name: Lease v. Lease
Court: Appellate Court of Indiana
Jurisdiction: Indiana
Decision Date: 1918-05-03
Citations: 67 Ind. App. 595
Docket Number: No. 9,636
Parties: Lease v. Lease.
Judges: 
Reporter: Indiana Court of Appeals Reports
Volume: 67
Pages: 595–596

Head Matter:
Lease v. Lease.
[No. 9,636.
Filed May 3, 1918.]
Appeal. — Dismissal.—An appeal in a divorce proceeding in which the only error assigned challenges the jurisdiction of the trial court because of the absence of the affidavit of residence, as required by §1066 Burns 1914, §1031 R. S. 1881, will be dismissed where the record, as corrected by writ of certiorari on the appellee’s petition, shows that the affidavit was properly' filed with the complaint.
From Hamilton Circuit Court; Ernest E. Cloe, Judge.
Proceeding for- divorce by Ada Lease against Schuyler M. Lease. From a judgment for the plaintiff, the defendant appeals.
Appeal dismissed.
M. G. Christian, Ira W. Christian and Ralph H. Walts, for appellant.
Gentry & Campbell, for appellee.

Opinion:
Hottel, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment and decree in appellee's favor granting her a divorce, alimony, and the care and custody of the children therein named.
The error assigned is: " The court had no jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the action."
It appears from appellant's brief that said assigned error is predicated upon the fact that the affidavit of residence required by §1066 Burns 1914, §1031 B. S. 1881, was not filed with plaintiff's complaint. The transcript originally filed herein shows no affidavit accompanying said complaint, but, since the filing of said transcript and appellant's briefs herein, appellee has filed a petition for a writ of certiorari, which has been granted, and the transcript, as now supplemented by the return to such writ, shows that the complaint was in fact accompanied by an affidavit of residence. As the only" question presented by appellant in his brief is that challenging the jurisdiction of the trial court because of the absence of said affidavit, the correction of the record as indicated leaves no further question presented for our determination.
The appeal is therefore dismissed.
Note. — Reported in 119 N. E. 480.