Claxton v. Pool

• Decision Date: 13 June 1914
• Parties: CORA CLAXTON, Respondent, v. MRS. L. D. POOL and L. D. POOL, Appellants
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

167 S.W. 623

182 Mo.App. 13

CORA CLAXTON, Respondent, v. MRS. L. D. POOL and L. D. POOL, Appellants

Court of Appeals of Missouri, Springfield

June 13, 1914

Appeal from Wright County Circuit Court.--Hon. C. H. Skinker, Judge.

AFFIRMED AS TO DEFENDANT MRS. L. D. POOL; REVERSED AS TO DEFENDANT L D. POOL. CERTIFIED TO SUPREME COURT.

STATEMENT.--Plaintiff Cora Claxton, recovered a judgment against the defendants husband and wife, for five thousand dollars, grounded on a charge of alienating the affections of plaintiff's husband and causing him to abandon her. The cause of action is stated in the following amended petition:

"Comes now the plaintiff and for her amended petition alleges and says that the defendants, L. D. Pool and Mrs. L. D. Pool, are husband and wife. Plaintiff further states that on the 25th day of December, 1900, she was lawfully married to and became the wife of L. E. Claxton. That from the date of said marriage until the 10th day of April, 1912, she and her said husband, L. E. Claxton, continued to live together; that during all that time plaintiff faithfully demeaned herself and discharged all her duties as the wife of L. E. Claxton and she and her husband lived together and enjoyed the aid support, companionship, society and affection of each other that the defendant, Mrs. L. D. Pool, well knowing that plaintiff and L. E. Claxton were husband and wife, and that they were living together and enjoying the aid, support, companionship, society and affection of each other, with the full knowledge and consent of her said husband, L. D. Pool, wrongfully, wickedly and maliciously with the wrongful, malicious and wicked intent to cause plaintiff's said husband to leave and abandon plaintiff, and to cease living with plaintiff as her husband, and to deprive plaintiff of the aid, support, companionship, society, protection and affection of her said husband, did by her wrongful, wicked and malicious acts and conduct, extending over a period of one or more years prior to the 10th day of April, 1912, completely and entirely alienate the affections of him, the said L. E. Claxton, from plaintiff, and did on the 10th day of April, 1912, pursuant to her said wrongful, wicked and malicious intent, with the full knowledge and consent of her said husband, wrongfully, wickedly and maliciously did entice, influence and induce plaintiff's said husband to leave and abandon her; and her said husband being influenced and acting under the said wrongful, wicked and malicious enticements, influence and inducements of the defendant, Mrs. L. D. Pool, of which the defendant, L. D. Pool, had full knowledge and gave his consent, did then leave and abandon the plaintiff; and being influenced and acting under said wrongful, wicked and malicious enticement, influence and inducement, has ever since remained away from and separate and apart from plaintiff.

"Plaintiff further says that ever since said abandonment of plaintiff by her said husband the defendant, Mrs. L. D. Pool, with the full knowledge and consent of her husband, L. D. Pool, has wrongfully, wickedly and maliciously detained and harbored plaintiff's said husband and has kept him separate and apart from plaintiff, and has by her said wrongful, wicked and malicious acts and conduct, of which defendant L. D. Pool, her husband, had full knowledge and gave his consent, deprived plaintiff and still does deprive her of the aid, support, companionship, society, protection and affection of her said husband, and has by said wrongful, wicked and malicious acts and conduct completely and entirely alienated the affections of plaintiff's said husband.

"Plaintiff says that because of the wrongful acts and conduct of the defendant, Mrs. L. D. Pool, of which said acts and conduct the defendant, L. D. Pool, had full knowledge and gave his consent thereto, she has suffered great humiliation and distress of mind and disgrace, and by reason of the premises aforesaid she is injured in the sum of ten thousand dollars, for which she asks judgment."

A demurrer to the foregoing petition was overruled; likewise, a motion to make more definite and certain. Defendants then met the issues tendered by a general denial.

Before any evidence was offered, each defendant separately objected to the introduction of evidence for the reason that no cause of action was stated in the amended petition.

The parties all resided in Hartville, in this State. At the time of the trial defendant L. D. Pool was fifty-one years of age, and his codefendant, Mrs. L. D. Pool, was forty-six years of age. They had been married a number of years and had reared a family, two of their children being grown daughters. The plaintiff at the time of the trial was thirty-seven years of age, and her husband was thirty-two years of age. They had several children living at the time of the trial.

The defendant L. D. Pool conducted a hardware store in Hartville and his time was occupied in that business. Defendant Mrs. L. D. Pool conducted a millinery shop, where she with her daughter, Artie Pool, and at times other lady clerks, were occupied. The husband of the plaintiff (L. E. Claxton) conducted a dry goods and clothing store, and the rear of his store was located near the rear of the millinery shop of Mrs. Pool, and he employed her to alter garments sold in his store from time to time as customers required. This employment, together with the fact that Claxton passed through the millinery shop in going to and from the post office furnished an explanation or excuse for his being in the millinery shop a number of times. The evidence shows that his visits there were frequent and continued for such a length of time that his presence there was noted by numerous citizens of Hartville, and the gossip finally reached the ears of Claxton's wife, the plaintiff.

It appears from the evidence that Mrs. Claxton was of a jealous disposition, and had been suspicious at different times of half a dozen married women and girls in Hartville--suspicious that her husband was unduly friendly with them. On hearing of his frequent visits to the millinery shop, she talked with Mrs. Pool about the gossip that was being passed from tongue to tongue and indicated that she would like to have the visits stopped.

The Claxton and Pool families were related by marriage and they were intimate. At various times prior to the separation of the plaintiff and her husband, the two families went to church together, and visited as relatives and friends are accustomed to do. Although plaintiff protested on several occasions to the defendant Mrs. Pool about allowing Claxton to visit the millinery shop, such visits continued, and the relations, so far as Claxton and the two defendants were concerned, seem to have never changed.

Some time before the separation of Claxton and his wife, defendant L. D. Pool was informed that Claxton was making frequent visits to the millinery shop and that there was a great deal of talk around town about the matter. The testimony shows that plaintiff was not suspicious of defendant Mrs. Pool at the time she protested about her husband's visits, but that plaintiff then thought her husband was going to the millinery shop to visit and be with the defendants' daughter, Artie Pool.

This condition continued until one evening soon after dark when plaintiff went to the rear of the Pool residence to see if her husband was there and if so what he was doing. After remaining in the alley behind the house a short time she saw her husband enter the granary and then saw defendant Mrs. Pool make several trips into the back yard near the granary and finally go into the granary and stay a short time during which time plaintiff heard a noise like kissing. The defendant Mrs. Pool, according to plaintiff's testimony, then went back to the house and plaintiff's husband left the granary and went his way not knowing that his wife was near. As to this episode, the plaintiff is corroborated by the sheriff and deputy sheriff who say they saw the defendant Mrs. Pool enter the granary and after being in there a while leave the same, and that the husband of the plaintiff left the granary after her. On this night, defendant L. D. Pool was not at home, nor were his two daughters.

Several nights later plaintiff went to the Pool residence with a club and when Mrs. Pool came to the door plaintiff struck her with the club, after which the fighting between the two women became general. It seems that Mrs. Pool finally overpowered the plaintiff and drew her into the house and held her down on a sofa until help could be summoned. Mr. Pool was sent for and immediately came, whereupon plaintiff related to him what she saw take place at the granary several nights before and referred him to the sheriff and deputy for corroboration. Pool was afterward informed by such corroborating witnesses that they saw what plaintiff told him occurred.

There is no evidence that defendant L. D. Pool was ever present at his wife's shop when Claxton was there. There is evidence that the night of the fight, after matters had quieted somewhat, Pool remarked that if he were Claxton he would never live with the plaintiff again, and this remark was made after he had been informed of the granary incident. Claxton came to the Pool home that night and had a talk with the two defendants, the substance of which is not disclosed, and then left and never again returned to his wife. There is evidence that after the separation of Claxton and the plaintiff, when the former had gone to Carthage, Mo., he sent a letter to the defendant Mrs. Pool written to him by his wife. This letter was given by Mrs. Pool to Mr. Pool who at first put it away and then destroyed it, and its contents remain unrevealed.

All the testimony goes...