ABRAMS, Metta A. vs. ABRAMS, Lester F.
Metta A. Abrams vs. Lester F. Abrams, divorce, cause heard and decree of divorce and custody of children awarded mother, and $25 per month for maintenance of children.
The Daily Review (Decatur), 13 Jun 1895
AHOLTZ, Isabel vs. AHOLTZ, Eli
Isabel AHOLTZ filed a suit against her husband for separate maintenance, alleging inhuman treatment. They married on Jan 7, 1893 until Dec 27, 1893 when she left him. The suit declares that he neglected to clothe her, that he would get up in the night and torture her, falsely accusing her of being intimate with other men. He said women were all alike, none good for anything, and all they wanted was a place to live and get men's money. Many other indiginities are alleged, some of them not fit for publication. She says her health is wrecked and she now has to depend on relatives for medical attention. The defendant is said have considerable wealth, including 50 acres of land worth $70 an acre and other property worth $800 or $1000. She asks a decree of separate maintenance and an injunction restraining him from disposing of his property.
Daily Review (Decatur), 4 January 1894
The case of Isabella Aholtz versus Ed Aholtz for separate maintenance was settled yesterday. In the settledment Mrs. Aholtz gets $500 in cash and all the personal property in the house. In consideration of this she signed away her interest in the farm of fifty acres and waived all rights to any other property the plaintiff has or may have in the future. She is also to live away from him and bring no more suits. This suit was dismissed at her cost. The farm was dded by the husband and wife to Aholtz's brother.
The Daily Review (Decatur), 30 Jan 1894
BLACKBURN, Julius vs. BLACKBURN, Ella A. (Smith)
Julius Blackburn today filed a bill for a divorce from his wife, Ella E. Blackburn. He alleges that he was married to the defendant at Martinsville, Ills., May 13, 1882, and that he lived with his wife until Oct. 14, 1900, when he was forced to leave. He charges that the wife was guilty of extreme and repeated cruelty and that she refused to prepare his meals and refused to administer to him when he was ill.
He also charges that his wife guilty of drunkenness and infidelity and made life such a burden to him that he was forced to withdraw from the home. The couple have five children and Blackburn asks for a divorce and also for the custody of the children.
The Daily Review (Decatur), 17 Oct 1900
CAMP, Lois vs. CAMP, Heber
There was no contest in the other cases. Lois Camp charged her husband, Heber Camp, with cruelty and there was no one present to deny it.
Decatur Herald, 20 Jan 1900
COX, Minnie L. vs. COX, Asa Thomas
Minnie L. Cox has filed a bill for divorce against Asa Thomas Cox. They were married July 7, 1907 and lived together until Sept., 28, 1907. She charges him with desertion and asks for the restoration of her maiden name, Minnie L. Bennett.
The Daily Review (Decatur), 21 Dec 1910
Pro confesso decree given in the Minnie L. Cox vs. Asa Thomas Cox divorce case.
The Daily Review (Decatur), 14 Jan 1911
Minnie L. Cox was granted a divorce from Asa Thomas Cox on the charge of desertion.
The Daily Review (Decatur), 29 Jan 1911
GORDON, Ithiel vs. GORDON, Thirza Ann
The End of It - The habitues of the circuit court need scarcely be told that Ithiel W. Gordon and Thirza Ann Gordon, an ill-mated couple living in Austin township, have been for several years engaged in the pastime of lawing each other - Ithiel seeking to be released from the thralldom of matrimony and Thirza Ann asking for separate maintenance and alimony. The divorce suit was disposed of at the February term, 1870, Ithiel failing to obtain his freedom from the restraints of wedlock. On the trial of the divorce case the evidence was of a nature disgusting and vulgar enough to satisfy the appetite of the most depraved reader of the Day's Doings, and the same filthy story was gone over again this week upon the trial of the suit for alimony. The court refused to grant the petition of Thirza Ann, and it is to be hoped that the end of the dirty case has been reached at last.
Decatur Review, 3 Aug 1871
HALEY, Mrs. vs. HALEY, Peter
Peter HALEY and his wife will probably separate. The assault case against HALEY will be settled Monday morning at 9 o'clock. Mrs. HALEY is unsure what charge to make against him. One thing she has fully decided on, she will not live with anymore. She is in dread of him and thinks if she makes the charges against him too strong he will do her further violence.
HALEY was penitent Wednesday. He said his temper got the best of him and he was very sorry for what he had done. He is willing to give up 1/3 of all he owns to his wife in the event of a separation. State Attorney MILLS does not expect to let the case drop, but will prosecute HALEY to the full extent of the law. HALEY still charges his wife with intimacy with her half brother, and she absolutely denies it. Mrs. HALEY is known among her acquaintances as a good woman and the charges her husband makes against her are not believed.
Daily Review (Decatur), 4 January 1894
HUSTON, Jessie A.D. vs. HUSTON, Allen Madison
Judge Vail granted a divorce to Jessie A.D. Huston from her one time husband, Allen Madison Huston. The charge was drunkenness. The wife testified that her husband wsa given to drink and Judge Vail asked, "How often was he drunk?" and the woman replied that he was drunk almost all of the time. The court then asked: "He was an habitual drunkard was he?" and the answer was in the affirmative. "Do you know these things to be true?" asked the court, addressing the witnesses who had come to testify in behalf of Mrs. Huston, and they nodded an affirmative and the court said that was enough and the decree was granted.
Decatur Herald, 20 Jan 1900
JONES, Mary E. vs. John E.
A Decatur Divorce Case in Chicago
We find the following in the Chicago Times report of the Cook County Circuit Court proceedings of the 16th inst.: A bill for divorce was filed by Mary E. Jones against John E. Jones, ex-sheriff of Macon county, on the ground of adultery.
Decatur Review, 19 May 1870
Martha E. Kemp has filed a bill in the circuit court to have her marriage with Joseph Keist annulled. They were married at St. Louis July 4, 1910, and she says that she then believed the marriage was valid and binding. She later learned that it was not because Keist had secured a divorce from his former wife at the January term of the circuit court in 1910 and under the decree he was ordered not to marry again within one year. She says she left him Sept. 1, 1910.
The Daily Review, Decatur, IL, 22 Sep 1916
MALLETTE, Anna Marie vs. Charles
Just before the adjournment of court the divorce case of Anna Marie Mallette vs. Charles Mallette. The complainant testified that the defendant had struck her on one occasion in a fit of anger and knocked her into the fire. On another he threw a shovel of snow on her head and several times threatened her life. The father and sister of the complainant substantiated her story and the court "said" that she had sufficient cause for divorce and granted the petition. The complainant was allowed to resume her maiden name of Anna Wheeler.
Decatur Herald, 16 Jan 1900
MALTBY, Gertrude vs. MALTBY, Harry
Just before court adjourned Monday noon the divorce case of Gertrude Maltby vs. Harry Maltby was heard. The parties lived at Blue Mound and the wife made the plea that her husband was an habitual drunkard and had on several occasions cruelly beat her. Her mother, brother, grandmother and a hired hand on the farm substantiated her charges and after hearing the testimony the court granted the divorc.
Decatur Herald, 19 Jan 1900
MILLER, George vs. MILLER, Caroline
George Miller is again enjoying a life of single blessedness. Last night he sat an hour by the stove, and as the wreaths of smoke circled about him, he dreamed of the years of happiness still in store for him. George is indebted to Judge Smith and Attorney Hutchinson for his present happy condition. The divorce was granted yesterday. For particulars call at Miller's lunch room.
Decatur Review, 21 Dec 1881
Mrs. E.B. Mueller Seeking Divorce; Hear Case in May
Mrs. Ruth Staley Mueller filed suit for divorce late Monday afternoon against Ebert B. Mueller. She alleges habitual drunkenness.
Mr. and Mrs. Mueller were married June 25, 1924, and lived together until Dec. 8, 1928. They have one child, Robert Eugene.Mrs. Mueller asks for custody of her son, and an order upon the defendant to pay proper sums for maintenance. The petition was filed by LeForgee, Black & Samuels, counsel for Mrs. Mueller, and will be docketed for hearing in the May term of circuit court.
Decatur Evening Herald, 12 Feb 1929
MUELLERS MAKE FUND FOR CHILD
Property Settlement for Protection of Son Made by Separated Couple
Property settlement for the protection of their son, Robert Eugene, has been arranged by Mr. and Mrs. Ebert B. Mueller. Mrs. Mueller has filed suit for divorce from her husband.
The settlement became known Wednesday, when a trust deed settling up a $15,000 trust fund was filed in the county recorder's office. By the deed, title to the Mueller house in 617 Sigel street is transferred in trust to the Millikin Trust company, with the provision that the house shall be sold within a year.
Of the purchase price, $15,000 is to be held in trust for the son. The remainder is to go to Mrs. Ruth Staley Mueller. The $15,000 will be held intact until the boy is 16 years old, when pricipal and interests is to be used for his education.
The deed gives Mrs. Mueller the use of the house for one year, of, if she chooses, she may pay $15,000 to the trustee and the house will be turned over to her. If the property is not sold within the required year, title is to go to Mrs. Mueller and a $15,000 mortgage to the trustee.
Decatur Evening Herald, 14 Feb 1929
Mueller Divorce Case to Be Heard In Present Term
Trial of the divorce suit brought by Mrs. Ruth Staley Mueller against Ebert B. Mueller probably will be heard in the present term of circuit court, it was learned Monday. The case was filed Feb. 11, which would ordinarily place it upon the docket for the May term, but it was said Monday that attorneys expect the defendant to file his written entry of appearance to allow hearing in the present term. No contest is expected. Through arrangement made out of court, Mr. Mueller recently provided a trust estate for their child.
Decatur Evening Herald, 18 Feb 1929
MRS. MUELLER IS GRANTED DIVORCE
Answer Filed by Husband Makes General Denial of Charge in Petition
Mrs. Ruth Staley Mueller was awarded a divorce decree from Ebert B. Mueller by Judge James S. Baldwin Monday in circuit court.
The case was brought before the present term of court through an entry of appearance by the defendant. He also filed an answer in which he related that a property right settlement has been reached. In his answer he made general denial of the charge of drunkenness which was made in the original petition filed by Mrs. Mueller. Attorney's for Mrs. Mueller filed a replication to this answer, declating their readiness to prove the allegations of the her bill.
Mr. Mueller did not appear in court, but was represented by the firm of Webber & Webber. LeForgee, Black & Samuels represent Mrs. Mueller.
Decatur Evening Herald, 26 Feb 1929
PULLEMAN (Pulliam), Damaris vs. Jane_
This is the correct information for this case, records of which are available through IRAD - Illinois State Archives
Plaintiffs Index C 1870 - 1890
Damaris PULLIAM vs. James PULLIAM
RUBY, Philena T. vs. RUBY, Spear S.
STATE OF ILLINOIS, Macon County - Of the February Term A.D. 1868, of the Macon County Circuit Court -
Philena T. Ruby vs. Spear S. Ruby - DIVORCE
SATISFACTORY affidavit of the non-residence of Spear S. Ruby, the above named defendant, having been filed in the office of the Clerk of the Macon County Circuit Court, Notice is therefore hereby given you, the said defendant, that a summons in Chancery has been issued out of said Clerk's office, returnable on the first day of the next term, to be holden at the Court House in Decatur, commencing on the fourth Monday in the month of February next.
Now, unless you, the said defendant, shall be and appear at said term of said Court and plead, answer or demer to said complainent's bill of complaint the matters and things therin alleged will be taken for confessed by you and a decree entered against you accordingly. - WM. L. HAMMER, Clerk - F.S. Murphy, Sol. Dec5 1867
Decatur Republican, 19 Dec 1867
SMITH, JOSEPH vs. SMITH, Salina
WANTS A REHEARING
Divorce Case Comes From Douglas on a Change of Venue
In the circuit court of Macon there has been filed for a re-hearing the case of Joseph Smith vs. Salina Smith the title of the action being, bill of review.
The suit has already attracted not a little attention in Douglass county. There Smith filed a petition asking for a divorce from his wife on the ground of extreme and repeated cruelty. She filed a cross bill and asked a decree making the same charge against her husband. After a hearing of the cause she was given a decree and allowed alimony in the sum of $240 per anum.
Later Smith filed a petition for a hearing saying that he had new evidence and could prove that his wife had been guilty of adultery and named the co-respondents. The woman then made affidavit that she could not get a fair and impartial hearing before Judge W.G. Cochrane and asked that she be granted a change of venue. That was granted and the case was sent to Macon. Thomas W. Roberts and Eckert & Moore appear for Mrs. Smith, and J.R. Eden, E.J. Miller and M.C. Lyria appear for the husband.
The suit will involve a lot of business as well as the social life of Smith who was at one time the owner of nearly a section of land. He became heavily involved by reason of having become security for one time friends who left him to meet the obligations.
Decatur Herald, 9 Jan 1900
TROUTMAN, Orpha vs. TROUTMAN, Elmer
Orpha Troutman proved a case of habitual drunkenness against Elmer Troutman.
Decatur Herald, 20 Jan 1900
TROUTMAN, Roy N. vs. TROUTMAN, Annie
The principal business was hearing evidence in divorce cases, and these, too, were short. Roy N. Troutman had filed a bill charging his wife with infidelity and asking a divorce. By her attorney, Hutchinson & Lee, the woman filed a cross bill charging Troutman with pretty much everything. When the case was called Troutman did not appear. The woman proved that she had been deserted and got the divorce.
Decatur Herald, 20 Jan 1900
This Page Was Last Updated Sunday, 21-Jan-2018 11:33:53 EST
Copyright 2011 by Cheryl Rothwell for ILGenWeb
All materials contained on these pages are furnished for the free use of individuals engaged in researching their personal genealogy. Any commercial use or any use for which money is asked or paid for any reason is strictly prohibited.