Berlingieri v. Berlingieri, No. 25043.

CourtSupreme Court of Illinois
Writing for the CourtORR
Citation22 N.E.2d 675,372 Ill. 60
Docket NumberNo. 25043.
Decision Date03 October 1939
PartiesBERLINGIERI v. BERLINGIERI.

372 Ill. 60
22 N.E.2d 675

BERLINGIERI
v.
BERLINGIERI.

No. 25043.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June 15, 1939.
As Modified on Denial of Rehearing Oct. 3, 1939.


Suit for divorce by Merry Fahrney Berlingieri against Arturo Berlingieri. The Appellate Court, 297 Ill.App. 119, 17 N.E.2d 354, reversed the Circuit Court's decree granting a divorce, and the plaintiff appeals by leave of the Supreme Court.

Judgment of Appellate Court reversed, and decree of Circuit Court affirmed.

[22 N.E.2d 676]

Appeal from Third Division, Appellate Court, First District, on Appeal from Circuit Court, Cook County; John Prystolski, Judge.
Frank E. Cantwell, of Chicago, for appellant.

Kamfuer & Halligan, of Chicago (Edwin A. Halligan and Samuel M. Lanoff, both of Chicago, of counsel), for appellee.


ORR, Justice.

Merry Fahrney Berlingieri obtained a divorce from Arturo Berlingieri in the circuit court of Cook county on the ground of cruelty. On appeal to the Appellate Court for the First District, 297 Ill.App. 119, 17 N.E.2d 354, this decree was reversed and we granted Mrs. Berlingieri leave to appeal from that decision.

Mrs. Berlingieri testified at the trial that she and Arturo Berlingieri were married in Harrison, New York, on July 31, 1937; that she was now living at the Ambassador Hotel in Chicago and that she had resided in that city all of her life. It further appears from the record that after her marriage in New York, on July 31, 1937, she and her husband remained at separate hotels in New York until August 3 of that year; on that date she left for California by train and he followed her by automobile. She testified that her husband struck her in their hotel apartment in California on August 7, on August 11, again on August 15, and a fourth time on August 20. Robert Chayne, her chauffeur, testified that he was outside the Berlingieri suite of rooms on August 7 and heard the plaintiff scream and that when he saw her immediately thereafter her face was inflamed. Anita Sparks, Mrs. Berlingieri's maid, corroborated the testimony of her mistress that defendant struck her on August 20. The husband denied on the witness stand that he had struck his wife at any time.

Two issues have been raised throughout the proceedings in this case: (1) Had Mrs. Berlingieri been a bona fide resident of Illinois for a year prior to the filing of her suit, and (2) is there sufficient testimony in the record to support the allegations of cruelty in the complaint? Section 3 of the Divorce act...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 practice notes
  • Glassman v. Glassman
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • 17 Abril 1944
    ...upon facts very similar is the decision of the Supreme Court of Illinois filed in 1939. That case is Berlingieri v. Berlingieri, 372 Ill. 60, 22 N.E.2d 675, 677. The Supreme Court in that case reversed the judgment of the Appellate Court of Illinois, which, in turn, had set aside a judgment......
  • Farah v. Farah, No. 59651
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 6 Enero 1975
    ...Illinois cases on the issue of defining the word 'residence' as used in these statutory grants of authority is Berlingieri v. Berlingieri, 372 Ill. 60, 22 N.E.2d 675. The Supreme Court carefully pointed out that residence and domicile are not synonymous. The word 'domicile' is applicable in......
  • Patel v. Illinois State Medical Soc., No. 1-96-3465
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 22 Julio 1998
    ...at 353, 220 Ill.Dec. 360, 673 N.E.2d at 280; Central States Import & Export, 405 Ill. at 59, 89 N.E.2d at 904; Chaitlen, 372 Ill. at 87, 22 N.E.2d at 675. Accordingly, it is not appropriate to apply waiver to a mootness argument, because mootness is at its core a lack of 6 The length of Bro......
  • Haring v. Haring, Gen. No. 69--13
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 22 Junio 1970
    ...court should not be disturbed. Tuyls v. Tuyls, Supra; Curran v. Curran, 19 Ill.2d 164, 166 N.E.2d 13 (1960); Berlingieri v. Berlingieri, 372 Ill. 60, 22 N.E.2d 675 (1939); Riva v. Riva, 93 Ill.App.2d 137, 235 N.E.2d 655 (3rd Defendant's defense of recrimination, affirmatively pleaded, if pr......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
14 cases
  • Glassman v. Glassman
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • 17 Abril 1944
    ...upon facts very similar is the decision of the Supreme Court of Illinois filed in 1939. That case is Berlingieri v. Berlingieri, 372 Ill. 60, 22 N.E.2d 675, 677. The Supreme Court in that case reversed the judgment of the Appellate Court of Illinois, which, in turn, had set aside a judgment......
  • Farah v. Farah, No. 59651
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 6 Enero 1975
    ...Illinois cases on the issue of defining the word 'residence' as used in these statutory grants of authority is Berlingieri v. Berlingieri, 372 Ill. 60, 22 N.E.2d 675. The Supreme Court carefully pointed out that residence and domicile are not synonymous. The word 'domicile' is applicable in......
  • Patel v. Illinois State Medical Soc., No. 1-96-3465
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 22 Julio 1998
    ...at 353, 220 Ill.Dec. 360, 673 N.E.2d at 280; Central States Import & Export, 405 Ill. at 59, 89 N.E.2d at 904; Chaitlen, 372 Ill. at 87, 22 N.E.2d at 675. Accordingly, it is not appropriate to apply waiver to a mootness argument, because mootness is at its core a lack of 6 The length of Bro......
  • Haring v. Haring, Gen. No. 69--13
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 22 Junio 1970
    ...court should not be disturbed. Tuyls v. Tuyls, Supra; Curran v. Curran, 19 Ill.2d 164, 166 N.E.2d 13 (1960); Berlingieri v. Berlingieri, 372 Ill. 60, 22 N.E.2d 675 (1939); Riva v. Riva, 93 Ill.App.2d 137, 235 N.E.2d 655 (3rd Defendant's defense of recrimination, affirmatively pleaded, if pr......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT