Gentry v. Gentry

• Decision Date: 11 January 1934
• Citation: 172 S.E. 157
• Court: Virginia Supreme Court
• Parties: GENTRY. v. GENTRY.

172 S.E. 157

GENTRY.

v.GENTRY.

Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia.

Jan. 11, 1934.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Henrico County.

Suit by Norris C. Gentry against Margaret S. Gentry, an infant, wherein defendant filed a cross-bill. From an adverse decree, defendant appeals.

Decree reversed, and cause remanded, with directions.

Argued before CAMPBELL, C. J., and HOLT, EPES, HUDGINS, GREGORY, BROWNING, and CHINN, J J.

Gordon B. Ambler and John C. Goddin, both of Richmond, for appellant.

Thomas O. Moss and Geo. B. White, both of Richmond, for appellee.

GREGORY, Justice.

Norris O. Gentry filed a bill in chancery against his wife, Margaret S. Gentry, asking for a divorce from bed and board on the grounds of desertion. Mrs. Gentry answered the bill, denied the allegation of desertion charged against her, and filed a cross-bill asking that she be awarded a divorce from bed and board from her husband on the ground of his desertion. Both parties claimed the custody of their two small infant children. The decree of the trial court granted the husband a divorce from his wife on account of her desertion and granted him the custody of the two infant children for nine months in the year and granted their custody to Mrs. Gentry for three months in the year. It denied Mrs. Gentry alimony and dismissed her cross-bill. The decree is now before this court for review.

It appears from the evidence that these parties eloped and were married in Washington, D. C., on June 25, 1025. At that time Mrs. Gentry was 15 and her husband 20 years of age. The father of Mr. Gentry accompanied them to Washington, was present when the marriage license was issued and when they were married. The mother of Mrs. Gentry, who was the surviving parent, knew nothing of the elopement or marriage until afterwards. She then procured a warrant for her son-in-law for swearing falsely in order to procure the license, but later had the warrant dismissed. Mr. and Mrs. Gentry, soon after their marriage, returned to Richmond and lived together in the home of Mr. Russell Gentry, the father of Norris Gentry, and they continued to live there until their relations were severed on the night of January 31, 1931. Two children were born of the marriage, and they were 4¹/₂ and 2¹/₂ years of age, respectively, when this suit was instituted.

As is usual in such cases, a great deal of the testimony is immaterial, and in stating the facts and circumstances of the final break we will only state those which we deem material and determinative.

Mr. and Mrs. Gentry lived happily together until the final separation, except that she was never satisfied to live with Mr. Gentry's parents, and no doubt living there has been responsible for a considerable part of their domestic troubles. She liked to go to dances, and he did not She would go to dances occasionally with others to which he raised no objection, but he would not care to accompany her. She liked social functions and amusements while he preferred to remain at home.

[172 S.E. 138]

He seemed older in his "attitude towards life than his years would denote."

In 1929, while she and her husband were visiting in Spotsylvania county, they met one John Wood Smith, and Mrs. Gentry and Smith became interested in each other. She later attended dances when he was present and for some five months before the separation they corresponded. Some of the letters from Smith fell into the hands of Mr. Gentry, and he and his wife talked about her relations with Smith. Mrs. Gentry promised to discontinue the correspondence, and so far as the record discloses she did not write any letters afterwards. Her husband, however, became suspicious.

On the night of January 31, 1931, Mrs. Gentry was invited by several married couples to a dance at "Pine Needles Camp." Mr. Gentry was also invited, but declined to go. He did not object to Mrs. Gentry going. When they arrived at the place for the dance, Mrs. Gentry found that Smith was there and they danced together. Later they went outside to the front of the building and sat in a Ford coupe car. An automobile light was shining upon the front of the Ford and several other couples were sitting in other nearby cars. Other guests were close around, going in and out of the building and to and from the nearby automobiles.

Mr. Gentry and a Mr. White, without Mrs. Gentry's knowledge, had followed her to the dance hall and were watching her. They had parked their car in front of the Ford in which Mrs. Gentry and Smith were sitting and it was the light from their automobile which was shining upon the Ford. A short time later Mr. Gentry and White left their car and went over to the Ford, and according to the testimony of White found Mrs. Gentry and Smith engaged in a "necking party." This was denied by Mrs. Gentry, but she admits that her conduct was indiscreet. She maintains her innocence, however, of any immoral conduct or violation of her marriage vows upon this or upon any other occasion. Mr. Gentry was somewhat indignant about what had taken place in the Ford and finding her with Smith. He thereupon told Mrs. Gentry that she could not return to her home that night. After a few words with Smith, Mr. Gentry and White left Mrs. Gentry at the dance hall. Later Mrs. Gentry was driven by Smith to the home of Mrs. Covington where she spent the night. The next day Mr. Gentry took Mrs. Gentry to the home of a Mr. Flippen where he left her after telling her again that she should not return to her home.

At no time since their separation has Mr. Gentry offered to receive Mrs. Gentry back in the home. He has made no attempts to become reconciled and has...