Krawcyzk v. Krawcyzk
| Decision Date | 19 February 1954 |
| Docket Number | No. 9355,9355 |
| Citation | 102 A.2d 870,81 R.I. 335 |
| Parties | KRAWCYZK v. KRAWCYZK. Ex. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Z. J. Czubak, Central Falls, for respondent.
This petition for divorce was brought by the petitioner on the grounds of extreme cruelty and neglect to provide. The respondent filed a cross-petition and relied on allegations of extreme cruelty and desertion. After a hearing in the superior court a justice thereof denied both petitions. No exception was prosecuted by petitioner who was not represented in this court, as her counsel had withdrawn, and the case is before us solely on respondent's exception to the decision denying and dismissing his cross-petition.
The respondent contends first that he did not have a fair hearing in the superior court, because the trial justice interrupted and harassed the witnesses to such an extent that normal and orderly procedure was made impossible; that he exhibited such bias and prejudice that his decision is not entitled to the usual weight to be attached thereto; and that, on the uncontradicted testimony of respondent's witnesses, his cross-petition should have been granted on the grounds of extreme cruelty and desertion.
We have carefully read the transcript of testimony and while it appears that the trial justice did question several of the witnesses at length for his own information, it nowhere appears that he limited their examination by respondent's counsel; nor did he prevent counsel from making as extensive an examination of the witnesses as he desired. In our opinion the transcript fails to show the existence of any such bias, prejudice, or harassing of witnesses on the part of the trial justice as respondent contends.
On the issue of extreme cruelty, the testimony was practically limited to one instance where petitioner slapped respondent's face and to the claims that 'She dealt a great deal in profanity especially in public'; that her refusal to entertain lost him all his friends; and that as a result of her aloofness he became moody, was mentally depressed and lost greatly in weight. No medical testimony was presented to support the latter claim.
The trial justice after referring to respondent as a 'rugged fellow,' stated with respect to the claim of extreme cruelty:
In our opinion the above statement of the law is substantially in accord with the decision of this court in Bastien v. Bastien, 57 R.I. 176, 189 A. 37, which holds that although physical acts of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Douglas v. Douglas
...husband by commencing this proceeding evidenced his consent to his wife's living separate and apart from him. Krawcyzk v. Krawcyzk, 81 R.I. 335, 338, 102 A.2d 870, 871 (1954); Burns v. Burns, 50 R.I. 129, 133-134, 145 A. 445, 448 (1929). The wife does not contend that the trial justice abus......
-
Wolf v. Wolf
...great weight and will not be set aside unless they are clearly erroneous or fail to do justice between the parties. Krawcyzk v. Krawcyzk, 81 R.I. 335, 102 A.2d 870 (1954). It is also our duty to determine whether, having made supportable findings, he applied the correct rule of law. Compare......
-
State v. Ouimette, 77-316-C
...great weight and will not be set aside unless they are clearly erroneous or fail to do justice between the parties. Krawcyzk v. Krawcyzk, 81 R.I. 335, 102 A.2d 870 (1954)." (Emphasis added) Id. at 376, 333 A.2d at A review of the record does not indicate that the trial justice was clearly e......
- Moss v. Rocky Point Park, Inc., 9399