116 A. 661 | R.I. | 1922
The original proceeding is by a petition for divorce and included therein is a prayer that petitioner be awarded the custody of a minor child and an allowance for support of petitioner and said minor child out of the estate of her husband, Harry Hurvitz. In the Superior Court, on motion of petitioner, the respondent was ordered to pay petitioner's attorney a certain amount for counsel and witness fees. A decision for divorce was later given in favor of the petitioner, with the custody of the minor child and an allowance for support of petitioner and her child. To this decision exceptions were taken and the cause is in this court on respondent's bill of exceptions.
The petitioner now moves in this court that she be awarded additional counsel fees. This motion is made on the theory that as the cause is now in this court on appeal and as the papers in the case are also here, the Superior Court for the time being has lost all jurisdiction of the subject matter. This assumption is incorrect. By Section 6, Chapter 273, General Laws 1909, it is provided that the Superior Court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction, except as otherwise provided by law, of petitions for divorce, separate maintenance, alimony and custody of children. The Superior Court is thus made the divorce court of the state with exclusive original jurisdiction. The proceedings in divorce are purely statutory (Sammis v. Medbury,
The motion for additional counsel fees should be made in the Superior Court. The motion in this court is denied without prejudice to the right of petitioner to bring a similar motion in the Superior Court.