A wife whose matrimonial domicil was in Washington, D. C., moved to Reno, Nevada, and there obtained a decree of divorce. Nine years later she filed a bill in the supreme court of the District of Columbia asking that the Nevada decree of divorce be declared void on the ground that she was induced to secure it by fraud and coercion; that a decree be entered requiring defendant to provide "maintenance and support"; and that his property within the jurisdiction of the court be sequestered to insure payment of the same. Sections 70 and 75 of title 14, Code D. C. 1929 provides that in case of husband's failure to pay an alimony or maintenance decree, the court may enter an order to sequester his property and apply the income thereof to the payment of such alimony as the court shall have decreed. Held, that a suit for maintenance is in personam; that a suit to have a decree of divorce annulled after nine years is barred by laches. Bliss v. Bliss (D. C. App. 1931) 50 F.(2d) 1002.