Landphair v. Landphair

• Decision Date: 06 April 1914
• Docket Number: (No. 242.)
• Citation: 165 S.W. 960
• Parties: LANDPHAIR v. LANDPHAIR.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

165 S.W. 960

LANDPHAIR v. LANDPHAIR.

(No. 242.)

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

April 6, 1914.

Appeal from Perry Chancery Court; Jeremiah G. Wallace, Chancellor.

Suit by Mary Landphair against E. A. Landphair, who filed a cross-complaint. There was a decree dismissing the complaint and cross-complaint for want of equity, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

P. H. Prince, of Conway, for appellant.

McCULLOCH, C. J.

Appellant and appellee intermarried on March 16, 1909, and separated finally in February or March, 1912. Shortly thereafter appellee instituted this action for divorce and alimony on the ground that appellant had driven her from his home and otherwise been guilty of cruel treatment. Appellant answered, denying the charges made against him in the complaint, and also filed a cross-complaint in which he asked for a divorce on the ground that appellee had treated him with studied neglect and offered such indignities as rendered his condition intolerable. On hearing the cause upon the testimony, the chancellor dismissed both the complaint and cross-complaint for want of equity.

The parties were, as before stated, married in March, 1909, and separated finally in February or March, 1912. They did not live happily together, as is evident from the testimony adduced, but it is not altogether clear as to where the responsibility lies. Appellant makes a case against his wife in his testimony. He states that she deserted him twice on former occasions and remained away from his home for a short while each time; that, while living with him, she neglected him and failed to provide sufficient food while he was in ill health; that she ridiculed his religious beliefs in the presence of acquaintances and neighbors, and in other respects treated him with studied neglect and offered indignities which were unbearable. She denies all this in her testimony, and says that she was a faithful wife to appellant and made a regular hand on his farm, working in the field, sawing wood, and doing other farm work.

Each of the parties introduced two witnesses in corroboration of their testimony. The witnesses who corroborate appellee are her sister and brother-in-law, who lived with them a considerable time during their married life. Appellant introduced one of his neighbors, who testified to a single act in regard to his wife treating him with disrespect while he was reading from a religious paper, in that way ridiculing his religious beliefs. The other witness is appellant's...