95 N.J. Eq. 143 | New York Court of Chancery | 1923
This is a suit for divorce from bed and board on the ground of extreme cruelty. The cause came on for final hearing on May 29th, .1923. lit the same time an order to show cause why the defendant should not be adjudged in contempt for not paying alimony pendente lite and counsel fee came before me. I heard the application, adjudged the defendant in contempt, and committed him to the Essex county jail, there to remain until he had purged himself.
Counsel for petitioner desired to proceed with the final hearing, notwithstanding my adjudication that the defendant was in contempt. I reserved decision as to whether the court of chancery will hear a divorce proceeding when either party is in contempt. There can be no doubt that if the petitioner had been in contempt, this court would not have heard the case. Han. Gh. Pr. *BOB, states the rule to be: “That a party in contempt cannot move until he has cleared his contempt, and that the rule is confined to cases where such party
[ felt that this court should proceed with the hearing of the cause, although the defendant was in contempt, but that the defendant had a right to be heard, which I granted by assigning counsel. Chancellor Williamson, in the case of Endicott v. Mathis, 9 N. J. Eq. 110, says: “As this is a matter so entirely in the' discretion of the court, where the court is simply vindicating its own dignity, it would seem that each case as it arises must depend very much upon its own peculiar circumstances.”
I. therefore, think that the rule should be stated in .this way: .When a petitioner is in contempt he cannot move his case without purging himself. When a defendant is in contempt the petitioner can move the case against the defendant,
Let an order be drawn granting the petitioner’s prayer for a divorce from bed and board on the ground of extreme cruelty, together with an order suspending the sentence heretofore made by this court in the contempt proceeding.