Court Opinion

ID: 9757465
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 22:41:42.659906+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:28:39.599866
License: Public Domain

Markell, J.,
delivered the following concurring opinion.
The court did not directly order plaintiff to restore what she took or find her in contempt for not doing so. Therefore I concur in holding that the progress of her suit should not be stayed indefinitely till she washes her hands of other misconduct.
I understand this court leaves open the questions of the power of the court to order plaintiff to restore, to find her guilty of contempt, and to stay further proceedings till she purge herself of contempt. She prayed not only maintenance, but a receivership and also security for alimony. I do not know what power the court has *594to require security of to pass upon' title to property. But these questions of jurisdiction were for the court-to decide, not for plaintiff to decide by taking the law in her own hands. Self-help has its place in the law, but not in competition with the court whose jurisdiction plaintiff has invoked. It would shock the general sense of fitness to suggest that a court has no power to prevent a husband from resorting to strong arm methods; on principle it should be just as shocking if the court could not prevent such tactics by the wife.