
    Mary R. Parmenter v. John W. Parmenter.
    Appeal. . Writ of error. Divorce. Code, j! 3158. In divorce cases, an appeal is the only mode of revising errors. In such cases a writ of error will not lie; and will he dismissed upon motion.
    EROM KNOX.
    The complainant filed a bill against her husband, for a divorce and alimony. Chancellor Lucky pronounced a decree for the complainant. » The defendant brought up the cause by writ of error. A motion was entered, by the counsel of the complainant, to dismiss the writ, upon the ground that an aft-peal was the only remedy, in such cases, for the revisal of errors.
    Crozier & Reese, for the complainant.
    John Baxter, for the defendant.
   McKinney, J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a writ of error, brought to reverse a decree in a divorce case, by which the marriage was dissolved, and the property of the wife, before the marriage, given back to her. The writ of error was prosecuted by the defendant, and a motion has been made to dismiss it. The motion must-be allowed.. It is positively declared, in sec. 8158 of the Code, that, “ in-divorce cases, an appeal shall be the only mode of revising-errors.”

This is a proper and necessary provision, intentionally adopted. Much mischief might be produced, if either party— in a case where the bond of matrimony had been dissolved— were permitted at any time within two years aft'”’ the divorce, to obtain a reversal of the decree, after a seeming acquiescence for a time, bj declining to appeal, and, possibly, after the other party had again married.

Motion to dismiss the writ allowed.  