Howard v. Howard, 42207
| Decision Date | 26 February 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 42207,42207 |
| Citation | 138 So.2d 292,243 Miss. 301 |
| Parties | Mrs. Virginia HOWARD v. Wesley H. HOWARD. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Jesse M. Byrd, Leakesville, Ben Stevens, Hattiesburg, for appellant.
W. S. Murphy, Lucedale, for appellee.
This is an appeal from the Chancery Court of George County, Mississippi, by the complainant-appellant Mrs. Virginia Howard against the defendant-cross-complainant-appellee Wesley H. Howard. Mrs. Virginia Howard alleged she and defendant were married April 12, 1947, and separated July 15, 1959. They have six minor children; she filed a bill for divorce on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment. She alleged that the defendant habitually nagged, cursed and abused her and committed personal acts of violence upon her on several occasions. Such mistreatment and misconduct has caused her to suffer physical and mental anguish to the extent that her nervous system was greatly impaired and her health and life endangered thereby.
Wesley H. Howard, defendant, denied all of these allegations and filed a cross bill for divorce from the complainant on the grounds of obstinate desertion for over a year. The court after hearing the evidence in the case denied both the complainant and cross-complainant a divorce, but did grant the cross-complainant custody of the children who were in the home of the cross-complainant's father and mother. The appellant had the right of visitation. The court disallowed alimony but did allow attorney's fee of $150.00.
The chancellor had before him all of the witnesses who testified. He had the opportunity to observe the witnesses, the manner in which they testified, and their appearance and demeanor on the stand. From all of the facts in the record, he was of the opinion that there was not sufficient evidence to justify a decree for either the appellant or appellee. We believe there is substantial evidence to support the findings of fact disallowing a divorce, and also sufficient findings of fact to justify his holding as to the best interest of the six minor children.
We will not reiterate the testimony in this case for we do not believe it would serve any useful purpose. It is one of those cases that shows the conditions of our modern home where both parents are working; both the appellant and appellee appearing to have more interest in their outside activities rather than domestic. The appellant is perfectly willing to take the appellee back and live with him.
In the case of Stringer v. Stringer, 209 Miss. 326, 46 So.2d 791, this Court held the Supreme Court should accept the chancellor's findings upon those matters which are supported by direct evidence as well as upon all conclusions which may be reasonably deducted. The Court said: 'Section 2735 of the Mississippi Code of 1942 authorizes the granting of a divorce upon any one of twelve different grounds, among which is habitual cruel and inhuman treatment. In discussing this ground Judge Amis in his excellent work, Divorce and Separation in Mississippi, Section 104, says: 'The popular idea is that, like...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Muhammad v. Muhammad
... ... Bland, 620 So.2d 543, 545 (Miss.1993); ... Page 1249 ... Howard v. Howard, 243 Miss. 301, 138 So.2d 292, 293 (1962); Russell v. Russell, 157 Miss. 425, 430-31, ... ...
-
Waller v. Waller
...for the custody of the children if he deems it necessary. Rasch v. Rasch, 250 Miss. 885, 168 So.2d 738 (1964); Howard v. Howard, 243 Miss. 301, 138 So.2d 292 (1962); Cox v. Cox, 233 Miss. 747, 102 So.2d 799, 801(1958); Scott v. Scott, 219 Miss. 614, 69 So.2d 489 (1954); Davis v. Davis, 194 ......
-
JONES v. JONES
...cohabitation impossible except at the risk of life, limb or health on the part of the unoffending spouse." Howard v. Howard, 243 Miss. 301, 303-04, 138 So.2d 292, 293 (1962). It is the opinion of this Court that the chancellor correctly concluded that Tim's conduct did not rise to this leve......
-
Burnett v. Burnett, 46859
...128 So. 270, 272 (1930). In discussing habitual cruel and inhuman treatment as grounds for divorce, we said in Howard v. Howard, 243 Miss. 301, 303-304, 138 So.2d 292, 293 (1962) 'The popular idea in that, like charity, it covers a multitude of marital sins, and is the easiest road to freed......