Bonney v. Bonney
| Decision Date | 29 November 1899 |
| Parties | BONNEY v. BONNEY. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
P. A. Aubertin and R. O. Harris, for libelant.
We are of opinion that the acts of the libelee did not amount to cruel and abusive treatment, within the meaning of Pub. St. c. 146, § 1. The libelant testified: Another witness for the libelant testified that the libelee Without doubt, the libelee failed to perform the duties of a wife, in failing either to stay at home and take care of her husband, or to consent to her husband hiring a nurse or housekeeper so to do. But the libelant was not dependent solely upon his wife. He was under the care of a physician, and had the money with which to secure proper food and nursing. It appears that he did in fact secure the proper food when he got up from his sick bed, by boarding with the occupants of another tenement in the same house, and that he afterwards went to Jamaica in search of health. If he was not content with sick in bed, his remedy was to hire a nurse, even if his wife wrongly threatened to leave his tenement if he did so. There was no pretense that this could not have been done through the physician in attendance. Under these circumstances, the fact that the plaintiff's health was temporarily injured by the libelee's failure to comply with the doctor's orders as to the libelant's diet and medicines is not sufficient. Her action in that respect may, in one sense, be said to be cruel, and the libelant may be said to have been abused by her. But it is not such cruel and abusive treatment as, under the circumstances of the libelant, will cause injury to his health, or create danger of such injury, or reasonable apprehension of such danger, if the parties continue to live together; and nothing less will make out a case of divorce on this ground. Bailey v. Bailey, 97 Mass. 373, 380, 381; Lyster v. Lyster, 111 Mass. 327-329. Libel dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Curtiss v. Curtiss
...v. Cowles, 112 Mass. 298;Holt v. Holt, 117 Mass. 202;Freeborn v. Freeborn, 168 Mass. 50, 52, 46 N. E. 428;Bonney v. Bonney, 175 Mass. 7, 8, 55 N. E. 461,78 Am. St. Rep. 473;Armstrong v. Armstrong, 229 Mass. 592, 593, 594, 118 N. E. 916, L. R. A. 1918D, 426. The findings of the trial judge a......
-
Webster v. Webster
...are found shaking his conclusion. On this point the case is well within the authority of numerous decided cases: Bonney v. Bonney, 175 Mass. 7, 55 N. E. 461,78 Am. St. Rep. 473;Curtiss v. Curtiss, 243 Mass. 51, 136 N. E. 829, and cases collected at page 53 (136 N. E. 830);Murray v. Murray, ......
-
Curtiss v. Curtiss
...111 Mass. 327 . Cowles v. Cowles, 112 Mass. 298 . Holt v. Holt, 117 Mass. 202 . Freeborn v. Freeborn, 168 Mass. 50 , 52. Bonney v. Bonney, 175 Mass. 7 , 8. Armstrong v. Armstrong, 229 Mass. 592 , 593, The findings of the trial judge are conclusive. Freeman v. Freeman, supra. It appears in t......
-
Carroll v. Carroll
...the libellant 'had not made out a case which would warrant * * * (a) finding that he was entitled to a divorce.' We agree. Bonney v. Bonney, 175 Mass. 7, 55 N.E. 461. The libellant objects to certain portions of the judge's voluntary 'Report of Material Facts' wherein he made reference to t......