Faulkner v. Faulkner

Decision Date05 December 1951
Docket NumberNo. 32,32
Citation198 Md. 495,84 A.2d 884
PartiesFAULKNER v. FAULKNER.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

O. Bowie Duckett, Baltimore, for appellant.

Helen Elizabeth Brown, Baltimore, on the brief, for appellee.

Before MARBURY, C. J., and DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, HENDERSON and MARKELL, JJ.

COLLINS, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order denying alimony.

On February 2, 1939, this court, in the case of Faulkner v. Faulkner, 176 Md. 692, 4 A.2d 117, reversed a decree of the Circuit Court No. 2 of Baltimore City and remanded the case for the passage of a decree granting the appellant, Margaret E. Faulkner, a divorce a mensa et thoro. As a result of that decree, an order was passed granting Margaret E. Faulkner a divorce a mensa et thoro, and the guardianship and custody of their minor child. Her husband, John Faulkner, was ordered to pay to her the sum of five dollars per week as permanent alimony and the further sum of $4.50 per week for the maintenance and support of their minor child, subject to further order of the court.

When the son became self-supporting the $4.50 per week for his support was eliminated by a decree. On September 30, 1948, Judge Mason decreed that all alimony payments by John Faulkner to Margaret Faulkner be suspended, without prejudice to the right of said Margaret Faulkner to make further application for alimony. At that time the wife was employed and making $35.50 per week. The record now before us does not show the financial condition of the husband at that time. On January 25, 1949, Judge Sherbow dismissed without prejudice another petition of the appellant for alimony. At that time the net income of the wife was $36 per week and that of the husband $60 weekly.

On May 9, 1950, another petition was filed by the appellant for alimony. On December 7, 1950, a supplemental petition was filed asking that John Faulkner be required to pay appellant's physician reasonable costs for an operation on the wife. After answers were filed to the petition and supplemental petition and after hearing in open court, Judge Niles, on the 29th day of March, 1951, ordered that the appellee 'pay his wife, Margaret E. Faulkner, through the Probation Department of Baltimore City, at the rate of $10.00 per week, the sum of $105.00 for medical and hospital expenses and the costs of the proceedings.' He dismissed the wife's petition for alimony 'without prejudice to the right of the plaintiff to make further application to this Court'. An appeal is taken from that order. No appeal was taken by John Faulkner. Dougherty v. Dougherty, 187 Md. 21, 32, 48 A.2d 451; Gunter v. Gunter, 187 Md. 228, 231, 49 A.2d 454.

At the time of the hearing in the case now before this court, the net income of the appellee, including calculated rent from a half interest in a house owned by him, was $65.50 per week. The net income of the wife at that time was $32.50 per week. The husband was employed as a salesman for the Wassell Pie Bakery and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Turrisi v. Sanzaro
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • September 1, 1986
    ...847 (1982); Rhoad v. Rhoad, 273 Md. 459, 330 A.2d 192 (1975); Buehler v. Buehler, 229 Md. 317, 182 A.2d 877 (1962); Faulkner v. Faulkner, 198 Md. 495, 84 A.2d 884 (1951); McSherry v. McSherry, 113 Md. 395, 77 A. 653 (1910); and Sody v. Sody, 32 Md.App. 644, 363 A.2d 568 (1976). The effect o......
  • Brown v. Brown
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • March 22, 1954
    ...and her children. In determining an award of alimony or support, the court has no precise rule or standard formula. Faulkner v. Faulkner, 198 Md. 495, 84 A.2d 884. The ability of the husband to provide support and the wife's need for it are controlling factors. The amount to be allowed in a......
  • Otis Elevator Co. v. Embert, to Use and Benefit of South St. Corp.
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • December 7, 1951
  • Zimmerman v. Zimmerman, 78
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • January 11, 1952
    ...and law. Waters v. Waters, 191 Md. 436, 440, 441, 62 A.2d 250; Saltzgaver v. Saltzgaver, 182 Md. 624, 635, 35 A.2d 810. Faulkner v. Faulkner, Md., 84 A.2d 884. The decree will be Decree affirmed, with costs. ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT