Adams v. Adams

• Decision Date: 22 June 1905
• Citation: 61 A. 628,101 Md. 506
• Parties: ADAMS v. ADAMS.
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

61 A. 628

101 Md. 506

ADAMS v. ADAMS.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

June 22, 1905

Appeal from Circuit Court, Dorchester County, in Equity.

Bill for divorce by Adelaide W. Adams against Harry R. Adams. From a decree of dismissal, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Argued before McSHERRY, C.J., and FOWLER, BRISCOE, BOYD, PEARCE PAGE, SCHMUCKER, and JONES, JJ.

Harrington & Mace, for appellant.

PEARCE J.

This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court for Dorchester county dismissing the plaintiff's bill for a divorce from her husband upon the ground of his adultery, which was established by the testimony. It does not appear where either of the parties resided before their marriage, but they were married in New York City on January 8, 1903, and immediately thereafter went to reside near Bridgeville, Del. While they were residing there, the defendant on several occasions between the date of said marriage and about August 10, 1903 committed adultery in Caroline county, Md., with one Bertha Pastwater, and upon being informed of this fact, and receiving his admission of his guilt, he left home, declaring he would never live with his wife again. Upon learning that he was still, while absent from home, continuing his relations with the woman mentioned, the plaintiff determined not to live with him again, and never afterwards cohabited with him, and in January, 1904, established her residence in Dorchester county, in this state, upon a farm which she then purchased. This bill was filed June 23, 1904, and was dismissed for want of jurisdiction. In the opinion accompanying the decree the judge said: "To me it would seem that the cause of divorce really occurred in Delaware and their marriage relations, if broken up or destroyed, were broken up in Delaware. Neither party was a citizen of Maryland. True, the evidence of the adulterous act shows it to have been committed in Maryland, but as a cause of divorce it must necessarily relate to parties as husband and wife living in Delaware. There were no marriage relations in Maryland to which the adultery could refer, and as the husband is not a resident of Maryland, but resides in Delaware or elsewhere, the wife should either bring her suit in Delaware, or reside in this state two years before bringing suit here." Section 35 of article 16 of the Code of Public General Laws of 1904 gives jurisdiction to the courts of equity of this state of all applications for divorce, and provides that "any person desiring a divorce shall file his or her bill in the court, either where the party plaintiff or defendant resides; or if the party against whom the bill is filed be a nonresident then such bill may be filed in the court where the plaintiff resides." Section 36 authorizes the court to decree a divorce a vinculo "for the following causes," among which is enumerated adultery. Section 38 provides that "no person shall be entitled to make application for a divorce where the causes for divorce occurred out of this state, unless the party plaintiff or defendant shall have resided within this state for two years next preceding such application." In dismissing this bill the court held that, though the act of adultery was committed in Maryland yet, as a cause of divorce, it must be regarded as occurring in Delaware, since there was no marriage relation in Maryland to which the act of adultery could be referred. But this is to confound cause and effect. The statute, in enumerating the causes of divorce, specifies adultery as one of these causes, and does not limit or restrict the adultery in respect of time or place, or in any way whatever. Adultery is an act, and that act, wherever committed, gives...