Court Opinion

ID: 9845518
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 03:23:35.4621+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:12.343542
License: Public Domain

Hill, Justice,
dissenting.
The per curiam opinion quotes Lindsay v. Lindsay, *394supra, which goes on to say that after a reconciliation a new action for divorce, alleging that the marriage is irretrievably broken again, must be filed. Hence, the husband here can refile his complaint for divorce. Unlike Lindsay, supra, the refiled complaint here will be in the same court.
No one gains by requiring a new complaint to be prepared and filed in the same court. It is true that the wife and her attorney have delayed the inevitable and can claim victory in the first play of this engagement. But the judicial system exists to resolve disputes, that is, to end them, not to provide an arena, umpire and scorekeeper for a playoff series.
The public is justifiably put out with legal games such as the per curiam’s "Go back, you didn’t say 'May I?’ ” and I am too.