Hadley v. Heywood

• Decision Date: 04 November 1876
• Citation: 121 Mass. 236
• Parties: Edwin W. Hadley v. Hiram H. Heywood
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

121 Mass. 236

Edwin W. Hadley v. Hiram H. Heywood

Supreme Court of Massachusetts

November 4, 1876

[Syllabus Material]

Worcester. Tort. The declaration contained two counts, the first alleging that the defendant had debauched the plaintiff's wife, and deprived him of her society; and the second that the defendant had alienated the affections of the plaintiff's wife from the plaintiff, and had enticed her to desert him.

At the trial in the Superior Court, before Rockwell, J., there was evidence tending to show intimacy and familiarity, manifested in various ways, between the defendant and the plaintiff's wife, and also tending to show that on November 2, 1870, they were seen together in the defendant's barn under circumstances which, it was contended, afforded opportunity for the commission of adultery, and that, in the spring of 1874, they were again seen at the same place, the woman leaving the barn and the defendant remaining therein; also that at some time in 1873 and again in the fall of 1874, the defendant's horse was seen hitched by the roadside, near woods, the carriage unoccupied, and that, shortly before and after, the defendant and Mrs. Hadley were seen in the carriage. There was also evidence tending to show that the defendant was frequently at the plaintiff's house to see his wife, both when the plaintiff was present and when he was absent, and that the defendant and the plaintiff's wife frequently walked and rode together. There was no specific evidence of the commission of adultery, or of any occurrences affording an opportunity therefor, other than as above.

The plaintiff testified that he had lived happily with his wife up to 1873, when he began to suspect her of infidelity in connection with the defendant; that thereafter he had been much troubled, had remonstrated with the defendant, had objected to his visits and his course of familiarity; and that in August, 1873, his wife had left him and gone to her mother's house to live, and that he had always treated her kindly, and had not offered her any personal violence.

In addition to much testimony controverting and explaining the case of the plaintiff as above, there was evidence on the part of the defendant tending to show that the plaintiff had been always morose, cross and profane, and that he had on various occasions used violence toward his wife, by striking her, &c., and that this treatment was both before and after the time he stated that his suspicions had been aroused regarding the defendant's intimacy with her; that he finally made a gross and scandalous charge against her, on hearing of which, while temporarily at her mother's, she decided never to return. The plaintiff's wife said under oath that his cruelty and this last charge were the causes for which she left him.

The defendant asked certain instructions as to the evidence of adultery under the first count, to the effect that the evidence was insufficient to warrant the jury in finding that any adultery had been committed, and that there was no evidence of any acts at or about the dates specified, such as would warrant a verdict under the first count, both of which requests were denied, and the defendant excepted. The details of these requests and the rulings given on these points are immaterial in view of the finding of the jury.

The defendant also asked the judge to instruct the jury that in order to find a verdict under the second count, the jury must be satisfied that the plaintiff's wife left him solely on account of the wrongful acts of the defendant, and that, if the cruelty of the plaintiff contributed to cause her to leave, he could not recover. The judge refused to rule as requested, and ruled on this point as follows: "If the conduct of the defendant was the controlling cause which induced the wife to leave her husband, and if the jury are satisfied that but for that cause she would not have left him, the plaintiff can recover, although there might have been other causes contributing to the same result." The judge had already instructed the jury that, upon the question of damages, the treatment and conduct of the plaintiff toward his wife were to be considered. The case was submitted to the jury on instructions as to both counts not objected to except as above.

In order to ascertain the materiality of the exceptions taken as to each count separately, by consent of parties, the judge informed the jury that on their return into court with a verdict he should inquire of them their finding upon each count. The jury after deliberation returned into court with a general verdict for the plaintiff, with damages assessed at $ 657.10. This verdict was affirmed, but not minuted upon the docket. The judge thereupon, at the...