ยง
In the Matter of V

4 Cited authorities

  1. Millar v. Millar

    175 Cal. 797 (Cal. 1917)   Cited 96 times
    In Millar v. Millar (1917) 175 Cal. 797, 807 [ 167 P. 394, Ann.Cas. 1918E 184, L.R.A. 1918B 415], this court held that the statutory residence requirement for divorce did not apply to annulment proceedings.

  2. Coats v. Coats

    160 Cal. 671 (Cal. 1911)   Cited 70 times
    In Coats v. Coats, 160 Cal. 671, the complainant (the husband) brought suit against his wife to have their marriage annulled on the ground that she was, at the time of the marriage, physically incapable of entering the marriage state.

  3. Briggs v. United States, (1950)

    90 F. Supp. 135 (Fed. Cl. 1950)   Cited 8 times

    No. 47586. May 1, 1950. Mr. Fred W. Shields, Washington, D.C., for the plaintiff. King King, Washington, D.C., were on the brief. John R. Franklin, Washington, D.C., with whom was Assistant Attorney General H.G. Morison, for the defendant. Before JONES, Chief Judge, and LITTLETON, WHITAKER, MADDEN and HOWELL, Judges. HOWELL, Judge. Plaintiff sues to recover certain sums which he claims became due him during the period from May 11, 1942, to March 7, 1946, representing monetary allowances in lieu of

  4. Estate of Gregorson

    160 Cal. 21 (Cal. 1911)   Cited 47 times
    Contrasting validity under predecessor of ยง 2210 with " marriage prohibited as incestuous or illegal and declared to be `void' or `void from the beginning'" as a legal nullity whose validity may be asserted in any proceeding in which the fact of marriage may be material