Citation network
Davis Vs. Davis
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Nov 07, 1938
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 32 (1938) U.S. Supreme Court Davis v. DavisSearch
-
U.S. 32 (1938) Davis v. DavisSearch
-
court on residence and jurisdiction, and the decree was enforceable in the courts of the District of Columbia. Haddock v. HaddockSearch
-
matter, and hence the decree was not entitled to full faith and credit. . . . It was necessary . . . under Haddock v. HaddockSearch
-
Thus, Congress rightly interpreted the clause to mean not some, but full, credit. Haddock v. HaddockSearch
-
U. S. 567 . The Act extended the rule of the Constitution to all courts, Federal as well as State. Mills v. DuryeeSearch
-
Plainly, the determination of the decree upon that point is effective for all purposes in this litigation. Baldwin v. TravelingSearch
-
on the connection in which used, various meanings have been attributed to the phrase matrimonial domicil. See Atherton v. AthertonSearch
-
Thompson v. ThompsonSearch
-
circumstances of each case whether, in accordance with the general rule, it is the domicil of the husband. See Cheely v. ClaytonSearch
-
a period more than sufficient to entitle him under, the laws of that State, to dissolution of the bonds. Cf. Harding v. HardingSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
standing to sue, she chose not to answer charges of willful desertion. This case differs essentially from Haddock v. HaddockSearch
-
made for the sole purpose of challenging jurisdiction is of no consequence if, in fact, it was not so limited. Sugg v. ThorntonSearch
-
Sterling Tire Corp. v. SullivanSearch
-
of time within which to answer implies application to that end. A motion for such an order relates to merits. Hupfeld v. AutomatonSearch
-
court and is bound by its determination that it had jurisdiction of the subject matter and of the parties. Cf. Andrews v. AndrewsSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Davis v. DavisSearch
-
of the District of Columbia. Haddock v. HaddockSearch
-
State. Mills v. DuryeeSearch
-
Baldwin v. TravelingSearch
-
See Atherton v. AthertonSearch
-
See Cheely v. ClaytonSearch
-
Cf. Harding v. HardingSearch
-
Hupfeld v. AutomatonSearch
-
Cf. Andrews v. AndrewsSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial