Case Name: WINE v. WINE
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1923-03-26
Citations: 1 Ohio Law Abs. 387
Docket Number: No. 1302
Parties: WINE v. WINE
Judges: 
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 1
Pages: 387–387

Head Matter:
No. 375
WINE v. WINE
Ohio Court of Appeals, Lucas County
No. 1302.
March 26, 1923
■This opinion has not been published except in Abstract.
DIVORCE — (1) Court .of Appeals has power to reverse a judgment on the merits in a divorce case— — (2) Verdict against weight of evidence reversed— (3) Issue must be’.confined to pleadings or to evidence.
Error to Lucas Common Pleas; reversed.
Attorneys — Brown, Geddes, Schmettau & Williams and H. W. Morgan, for Wm. Wine; Hackett & Lynch, contra.

Opinion:
RICHARDS, J.;
Epitomized Opinion
Wm. Wine sued Lottie Wine for divorce, alleging misconduct. Lottie W. filed an answer denying the charges, but did not file a cross petition. either for divorce or alimony. The case was tried on its merits and resulted in a judgment for Lottie awarding to her $275 per month as alimony. Her counsel contends that the Court of Appeals is without jurisdiction to reverse a judgment tried on its merits. Held by the Court of Appeals in reversing judgment:
1. The Court of Appeals has power to reverse all final judgments of courts of Common Pleas and other courts of record.
2. The evidence in this case does not justify a verdict for the defendant and the judgment must he reversed.
3. The issues in a case should be confined to and defined by either the pleadings or the evidence. Neither the pleadings nor the evidence raised the question of alimony in this case and the judgment awarding alimony is not justified.