Coble v. Coble
| Decision Date | 30 June 1856 |
| Citation | 2 Jones 392,55 N.C. 392 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | ELIZABETH COBLE v. JOHN COBLE. |
To entitle the wife to divorce a mensa et thoro, it is not necessary that the indignities complained of as rendering her condition intolerable and her life burdensome, should be a striking, or even touching of, the body, but foul and injurious accusations often repeated, with a withdrawal of all intercourse, refusing to bed with his wife, and a denial that she is his wife, with threats against her iife, are sufficient indignities to entitle the wife to this relief.
PETITION for divorce, from the Court of Equity of Alamance County.
The petition alleges that plaintiff and defendant intermarried about twenty-four years ago; that some four years after the marriage, the defendant, being of a jealous temperament, charged plaintiff with infidelity to him, which was untrue; that she endeavored by kindness to eradicate this jealousy from his mind, and for some time thought she had done so, but that in 1852, it appeared anew; about that time, the defendant, upon the most frivolous and groundless pretences, began to accuse her of an improper intimacy with one Dr. ____, a young man who had lived for two years with defendant and the petitioner; that he perpetually harrassed her with these painful accusations, and manifested by his language and conduct, contempt and hatred towards her; that the young man spoken of left the house, but his absence wrought no change whatever in defendant's conduct; that he continued his cruel treatment; refused to recognise her as his wife and to bed with her, and withdrew himself from her society; that her friends, sympathising with her, endeavored to bring about a reconciliation, but he repelled all approaches of this sort; and, on one occasion, told her father, who was thus interposing in her behalf, that “he had lead in his gun, and would have satisfaction;” that, thus finding her life with the defendant intolerable and burdensome, and apprehensive of personal violence, she left his house, and has since resided with her father and friends, and has been maintained and supported by their kindness; that defendant refuses all offers on the part of the plaintiff to return to his house or to make any provision for her. When applied to to that effect, his answer was that he would give her nothing except what she could get by law.
The petition sets forth that, just before filing the petition, she went to defendant's house with two of her friends, whom she procured to intercede with him, but he again refused to live with her; that she had carried some clothing with her, and placed it in one of the rooms of the house, from which defendant had it removed, and locked the room, and the other rooms of the house, and left home.
The plaintiff alleges that the defendant is selling off his property, and preparing to remove out of the State.
The prayer of the bill is for a divorce from bed and board, and for alimony; and for a writ to restrain the defendant from removing his property beyond the jurisdiction of the State; also for general relief.
The defendant filed a general demurrer, and the cause being set down for argument on the demurrer, was sent to this Court by consent.
Norwood, for plaintiff .
No counsel for defendant.
The bill is filed for the purpose of obtaining a divorce, a mensa et thoro, and also for alimony, under the 3rd section of the 39th chapter of the Rev. Stat. The defendant has put in a general demurrer, which must be overruled if there be any part of the bill upon which the plaintiff is entitled to relief. Adams' Eq. 335; 1 Dan. Chan. Prac. 538, 540. Earp v. Earp, 1 Jones' Eq. Rep. 239.
The third section of the act referred to specifies several distinct things, the doing of either of which by a husband will entitle his wife to a partial divorce, and to alimony. If he “shall abandon his family, or maliciously turn...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bailey v. Bailey
...by the husband.' We have held in Pearce v. Pearce, 226 N.C. 307, 37 S.E.2d 904; Green v. Green, 131 N.C. 533, 42 S.E. 954; and in Coble v. Coble, 55 N.C. 392, that where a divorce a mensa et thoro is sought under G.S. § 50-7, subd. 4, on the ground that the defendant offers such indignities......
-
Pearce v. Pearce
...G.S. s 50-7, subd. 4; Jackson v. Jackson, 105 N.C. 433, 11 S.E. 173; Green v. Green, 131 N.C. 533, 42 S.E. 954, 92 Am.St.Rep. 788; Coble v. Coble, 55 N.C. 392. Under this section of the code allegation of actual physical violence is not required. Coble v. Coble, supra; Green v. Green, supra......
-
Cushing v. Cushing, 95
...plaintiff to have alleged sufficiently a cause of action based on indignities committed by defendant prior to March 15, 1963, Coble v. Coble, 55 N.C. 392, 395, yet the complaint avers that after a separation of two weeks, plaintiff returned to defendant and lived with him until April 12, 19......
-
Green v. Green
...begotten by the plaintiff's uncle. Upon demurrer to the evidence, the court gave judgment of nonsuit. In this there was error. In Coble v. Coble, 55 N. C. 392, it is said that it is not necessary that, to render the plaintiff's condition intolerable and life burdensome, there should be a st......