Washburn v. Catlin

This was an action for divorce a vinculo ; a judgment was rendered dissolving the marriage, but making no provision for alimony, or for the support of Mary B. Gatlin, a child of the marriage. About nine years thereafter motion was made for an order directing defendant to pay plaintiff “ such sum, in gross, as shall be equal to the expense of the maintenance and education of Mary B. Gatlin, .incurred since January, 1877, to the entry of said order,” and also such sums “ as may be necessary and proper for the education and maintenance of the said Mary B. Gatlin during her minority.” The motion was denied; on appeal to the General Term, the Special Term order was reversed and motion granted, and a reference directed to determine the proper allowances. The court here say: “ The construction of sec. 59, tit. 1,” chap. 8, pt. 2, of the Revised Statutes, has been passed upon at this term in the case of Erkenbraoh v. Erkenbraoh,* adversely to the contention of the defendant, and the right given by the section was, we think, preserved by section 3 of the Repealing Act (Chap. 245, Laws of 1880).”