Dougherty v. Dougherty
Decision Date | 19 May 1922 |
Docket Number | 2793. |
Parties | DOUGHERTY v. DOUGHERTY. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
The court admitted the following evidence of a witness for the plaintiff, on the trial of a suit for divorce and alimony "After I came back from my supper we stopped out on the porch a little while, and I told him [defendant] quite frankly I did not believe he had been quite fair in playing the marriage game." It was objectionable on the ground that it was a mere opinion, and of no probative value. In view of the character of the evidence submitted by the plaintiff on the trial, this ruling requires a reversal.
Cruel treatment, as a ground for divorce, is the "willful infliction of pain, bodily or mental, upon the complaining party, such as reasonably justifies an apprehension of danger to life, limb, or health." Black v. Black, 149 Ga. 506, 101 S.E. 182, and citations. "The intention to wound is a necessary element of the cruel treatment for which divorce is allowed." Ring v. Ring, 118 Ga. 183 44 S.E. 861, 62 L.R.A. 878; Smith v. Smith, 119 Ga 239, 46 S.E. 106. "Slight disagreements and words inspired by transitory temper were never intended by the statute as a cause for setting aside a marriage contract." Brown v. Brown, 129 Ga. 246, 58 S.E 825.
Applying the principles stated in the next preceding headnote, the court erred in admitting, over appropriate objection duly made, the evidence hereinafter set out. In no view of the case could such evidence be considered, either by itself or in conjunction with other evidence submitted, as constituting such cruel treatment as to authorize the grant of a divorce.
(a) Evidence that the defendant "was at home all the time but that he would occasionally go down town on a little business, and be gone an hour at the time."
(b) That "the little girl [their daughter] was six years old, and had to walk a mile and an eighth to school."
(c) Testimony of the plaintiff that In regard to the last-quoted...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Tayer v. York Ice Machinery Corp.
...v. Charleston, etc., Railroad Co., 105 S.E. 350; Haygood v. Clark Co., 107 S.E. 379; Lane v. Happ Bros. Co., 162 S.E. 519; Dougherty v. Dougherty, 112 S.E. 454; Securities Inv. Co. v. White, 91 S.W.2d Bloecher & Schaaf v. Pa. Railroad Co., 160 A. 281; Tennis Coal Co. v. Sackett, 190 S.W. 13......
-
Durham v. Durham
...surely in any state of life, but still they are not that cruelty against which the law can relieve." See, also, Dougherty v. Dougherty, 153 Ga. 487, 112 S. E. 454; Brown v. Brown, 129 Ga. 246, 58 S. E. 825, and other cases not here specifically referred to, but cited in these cases. A readi......
-
Morris v. Morris
...of the cruel treatment for which divorce is allowed. Ring v. Ring, supra, Smith v. Smith, 119 Ga. 239, 46 S.E. 106; Dougherty v. Dougherty, 153 Ga. 487, 112 S.E. 454; Durham v. Durham, 156 Ga. 454, 458, 119 S.E. Lowry v. Lowry, 170 Ga. 349, 153 S.E. 11, 70 A.L.R. 488. 'Mental anguish, wound......
-
Morris v. Morris, 15382.
...of the cruel treatment for which divorce is allowed. Ring v. Ring, supra, Smith v. Smith, 119 Ga. 239, 46 S.E. 106; Dougherty v. Dougherty, 153 Ga. 487, 112 S.E. 454; Durham v. Purham, 156 Ga. 454, 458, 119 S.E. 702; Lowry v. Lowry, 170 Ga. 349, 153 S.E. 11, 70 A.L.R. 488. "Mental anguish, ......