## Facts

- Mary G. Bell sued Frederick A. Bell in New York for divorce and alimony, alleging his adultery in Buffalo, New York.
- Frederick appeared and asserted a Pennsylvania divorce decree he obtained after filing in Pennsylvania on grounds of Mary’s desertion.
- In the Pennsylvania proceeding, Mary was not personally served, did not appear, and service was by publication and mailed notice; a default decree was entered.
- Mary challenged the Pennsylvania decree in New York, alleging Pennsylvania lacked jurisdiction because neither spouse was domiciled there.
- A referee found the parties married in Illinois (1878) and lived together in Rochester and then Buffalo, New York; after Mary left in 1882 they did not resume cohabitation, and she maintained New York residence.
- The referee found Frederick was not a bona fide Pennsylvania resident, including evidence that he swore in a New York probate matter shortly before the Pennsylvania filing that he was a resident of Erie County, New York.
- New York courts accepted the referee’s findings, refused to recognize the Pennsylvania decree, granted Mary a New York divorce, and awarded alimony and costs.
- Frederick sought U.S. Supreme Court review, arguing the Full Faith and Credit Clause required New York to honor the Pennsylvania decree.
- After argument and before decision, Frederick died; Mary sought entry of judgment nunc pro tunc to preserve the alimony and costs award.

## Issues

1. Whether a divorce decree entered on constructive service in a state where neither spouse is domiciled is entitled to full faith and credit in another state.
2. Whether jurisdictional recitals in the rendering state’s divorce proceedings are conclusive, or may be contradicted in a collateral challenge.
3. Whether the husband’s death after argument but before decision abated the proceeding, or permitted affirmance nunc pro tunc where alimony and costs were awarded.

## Decision

- The Court affirmed the New York judgment.
- The Court held the Pennsylvania court lacked jurisdiction because neither spouse was domiciled in Pennsylvania and the decree was obtained on constructive service against a nonappearing spouse.
- The Court held the Pennsylvania decree was not entitled to full faith and credit in New York or any other state.
- The Court held the jurisdictional facts recited in the Pennsylvania record could be contradicted by evidence showing lack of domicile.
- The Court held Frederick’s death did not abate the case because the judgment included alimony and costs, which survived the termination of the marriage by death.
- The Court ordered affirmance entered nunc pro tunc as of the date of argument.

## Legal Principles

- A state court cannot grant a valid divorce on constructive service when neither party is domiciled in that state.
- Full faith and credit does not require recognition of a sister-state divorce decree rendered without jurisdiction over the marital status through domicile.
- Jurisdictional recitals in a judgment may be impeached by proof that the rendering court lacked jurisdictional facts, including bona fide domicile.
- Death of a party moots only the dissolution aspect of a divorce controversy; adjudicated financial awards such as alimony and costs may remain justiciable.
- An appellate court may enter judgment nunc pro tunc when needed to preserve rights affected by delay after submission.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld New York’s refusal to recognize a Pennsylvania ex parte divorce because neither spouse was domiciled in Pennsylvania, making the decree jurisdictionally void and outside full faith and credit; it also affirmed nunc pro tunc despite the husband’s death because the alimony and costs portions of the judgment remained enforceable.


Bell v. Bell, 181 U.S. 175 (1901)