TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Capasso v. Colonna

Carmela Capasso, Alias Carmela Colonna, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Nicola Colonna, Defendant-Respondent

Capasso v. Colonna, 124 A. 760 (N.J. 1924)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 19, 1924
Judges
PER CURIAM.
Citations
124 A. 76096 N.J. Eq. 38511 Stock. 3851924 N.J. LEXIS 441

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

Per Curiam.

The decree will be affirmed, and except as presently noted, for the reasons given in the opinion of the chancellor.

The opinion contains the following paragraph:

“No statute, whether relating to marriage or anything else, if in the ordinary general form of words, will be given any effect outside of the local jurisdiction of the government enacting it. To bind even citizens abroad, it must either specifically in terms, or by necessary implication, include them.”

Without passing on the correctness or otherwise of the broad and sweeping proposition just quoted, it is sufficient to say that our courts will not undertake to enforce by decree of nullity the New York statute relied on.

As to the matter of duress, it is argued that the evidence of the lapse of time between the alleged threat and the marriage ceremony was misinterpreted by the chancellor, and also not reported in full by the special master. If he failed to report it fully, such failure cannot be rectified here; application should have been made to the court below. Viewing it as it stands, we cannot say that the chancellor placed an erroneous construction upon it.

The decree will be affirmed.

*386 For affirmance — The Chibe - Justice, Trenciiard, Parker, Minturn, Kaliscit, Black, Katzbnbach, Campbell, White, Gardner, Van Buskirk, MoGlennon, Kays —13 For reversal—Lloyd, Clark—2.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1929: 11932: 11946: 11947: 11951: 11957: 11958: 12003: 119292026peak 1929 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Chirelstein v. Chirelstein79 A.2d 884 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1951)
  2. Sturm v. Sturm163 A. 5 (N.J. Ct. of Ch. 1932)
  3. Hochman v. Zigler's, Inc.50 A.2d 97 (N.J. Ct. of Ch. 1946)
  4. Wilkins v. Zelichowski140 A.2d 65 (N.J. 1958)
  5. St. Joseph's Hospital & Medical Center v. Muirfield Const. Co.829 A.2d 652 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2003)
  6. Ewert v. Lichtman55 A.2d 671 (N.J. Ct. of Ch. 1947)

Most recent

  1. St. Joseph's Hospital & Medical Center v. Muirfield Const. Co.829 A.2d 652 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2003)
  2. Wilkins v. Zelichowski140 A.2d 65 (N.J. 1958)
  3. Wilkins v. Zelichowski129 A.2d 459 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1957)
  4. Chirelstein v. Chirelstein79 A.2d 884 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1951)
  5. Ewert v. Lichtman55 A.2d 671 (N.J. Ct. of Ch. 1947)
  6. Hochman v. Zigler's, Inc.50 A.2d 97 (N.J. Ct. of Ch. 1946)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list