Camire v. Camire
| Decision Date | 01 June 1921 |
| Docket Number | No. 5466.,5466. |
| Citation | 113 A. 748 |
| Parties | CAMIRE v. CAMIRE. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Exceptions from, Superior Court, Providence and Bristol Counties; J. Jerome Hahn, Judge.
Petition for divorce by Charles Camire against Emma Camire. Petition denied, and plaintiff excepts. Exceptions overruled, and case remitted for further proceedings.
Thomas F. Vance, of Pawtucket, for petitioner.
Lawrence F. Nolan, of Pawtucket, guardian ad litem, for respondent.
This is a petition for divorce from the bond of marriage on the ground that the parties have lived separately and apart for more than 10 years immediately preceding the filing of the petition.
Upon the suggestion that the respondent was confined in an insane hospital as a person of unsound mind the superior court appointed a guardian ad litem for the respondent to protect her rights in the course of this proceeding.
The cause was heard before a justice of the superior court, and at the conclusion of the evidence said justice found that the parties had lived separate and apart for 10 years before the petition was filed; but that during the last 2% years of that period the respondent had been insane and confined in the Taunton Hospital for the Insane. The justice then denied the petition on the ground that the parties had not for 10 years been living separate and apart within the meaning and intent of the statute. To this decision the petitioner excepted, and has brought the exception before us.
The statutory provision relating to the ground of divorce relied on by the petitioner is contained in section 3, chapter 247, General Laws 1909, and is as follows:
"Whenever in the trial of any petition for divorce from the bond of marriage, it shall be alleged in the petition that the parties have lived separate and apart from each other for the space of at least ten years, the court may in its discretion enter a decree divorcing the parties from the bond of marriage, and may make provision for alimony."
If said justice had denied the petition in the exercise of the discretion given by the foregoing section, we would not review his decision unless in some way it was made to appear clearly that his action was an abuse of the discretion conferred. The justice, however, based his decision upon a construction of the statute, and his action thus presents a question of law reviewable upon the petitioner's exception.
The petitioner urges that the statutory provision in question is without...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pierce v. Pierce
... ... separate and apart from each other for the space of at least ... ten years.' Construing this statute, in Camire v ... Camire (R. I.) 113 A. 748, the Supreme Court of that ... state held in substance that the courts were not obliged to ... ...
-
Rice v. Rice
...87, 216 S.W.2d 141; Heim v. Heim, 35 Ohio App. 408, 172 N.E. 451; Castner v. Castner, 159 Pa.Super. 387, 48 A.2d 117; Camire v. Camire, 43 R.I. 489, 113 A. 748; Note, 19 A.L.R.2d 144. We think that the law of Massachusetts accords with that consensus of American In England the law appears t......
-
Smith v. Smith
...65 A. 609, 13 Ann. Cas. 835; Thrift v. Thrift, 30 R. I. 357, 75 A. 484; Scolardi v. Scolardi, 42 R. I. 456, 108 A. 651; Camire v. Cam ire, 43 R. I. 489, 113 A. 748; Roy v. Roy, 44 R. I. 160, 116 A. 283; Grant v. Grant, 44 R. I. 169, 116 A. 481; Hurvitz v. Hurvitz, 44 R. I. 243,116 A. 661; I......
-
Williams v. Williams
... ... part of a spouse who is mentally incapable of as senting. Lee ... v. Lee, supra; Woodruff v. Woodruff, supra; Camire v ... Camire, 43 R.I. 489, 113 A. 748; Pile v. Pile, ... 94 Ky. 308, 309, 22 S.W. 215; Messick v. Messick, ... 177 Ky. 337, 197 S.W. 792, ... ...