108 So. 573 | Ala. | 1926
Appellant, after judgment rendered in favor of appellee on her petition for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act (Laws 1919, p. 206), made its motion that further compensation be denied appellee on the ground that, since the award to her, she had contracted marriage with one James Rowe. The motion was overruled.
Appellee's compensation would have ceased on her marriage. Code, § 7564. But she denied her marriage to Rowe. She admitted that she had gone through a ceremonial marriage under license from the probate court, and had lived with Rowe as his wife. *530
But she further insisted, and the proof sustained her insistence, that her marriage with Rowe was unlawful, because he was under disability to contract marriage, and that her relation with him had been discontinued. Rowe's disability arose out of the fact that a former wife, still living, had procured a decree of divorce from him, and that neither by the decree of divorce nor by any subsequent decree had he been allowed to marry again. Appellee's second marriage, so to speak, was a nullity. Code, §§ 7410, 7425, 3440, 3441; Barfield v. Barfield,
Affirmed.
ANDERSON, C. J., and GARDNER and MILLER, JJ., concur.