Manning v. Manning, 29400
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | Anderson, J. |
| Citation | 160 Miss. 318,133 So. 673 |
| Decision Date | 20 April 1931 |
| Docket Number | 29400 |
| Parties | MANNING v. MANNING |
133 So. 673
160 Miss. 318
MANNING
v.
MANNING
No. 29400
Supreme Court of Mississippi
April 20, 1931
Division B
1. DIVORCE.
Doctrine of condonation applies to what is generally denominated noncontinuing causes of divorce, consisting of single act or series of acts of misconduct, which might be forgiven.
2. DIVORCE.
Doctrine of condonation is inapplicable to causes of divorce of continuing character.
3. DIVORCE.
Habitually cruel and inhuman treatment, as ground for divorce, consists generally of course of conduct, rather than single act.
4. DIVORCE.
Cohabitation after act of cruelty constituting part of habitually cruel and inhuman treatment cannot be considered as condonation.
5. DIVORCE.
Wife's condonation of past acts of husband constituting grounds for divorce is impliedly conditioned upon future good behavior of husband.
[160 Miss. 319]
6. DIVORCE.
Where cruelty of husband is repeated after condonation, wife's right to make condoned offense a ground for divorce is revived.
HON. J. L. WILLIAMS, Chancellor.
APPEAL from chancery court of Sunflower county, HON. J. L. WILLIAMS, Chancellor.
Suit by Rebecca Elizabeth Manning against R. W. Manning, Jr. From a decree for the complainant, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Affirmed.
Moody & Johnson, of Indianola, for appellant.
Condonation in the law of divorce is the forgiveness of an antecedent matrimonial offense on condition that it shall not be repeated, and that the offender shall thereafter treat the forgiving party with conjugal kindness. It has been held that the doctrine of condonation applies to all charges of matrimonial misconduct. Thus it has been held to include cruel and inhuman treatment, except that the cruelty is condoned only until the particular act is repeated.
19 C. J., p. 83, sec. 192.
A continuance of cohabitation will condone an act of cruelty and bar divorce therefor, unless it is apparent from the circumstances that the life or health of the innocent party will be endangered by a continuance of the marriage relation.
19 C. J., p. 86, sec. 198; Youngs v. Youngs, 22 N.E. 806.
The doctrine of condonation applies as well to cruelty and other grounds for divorce as to adultery; the difference being that an act of cruelty is condoned only until the particular act is repeated.
Murchison v. Murchison, 171 S.W. 790; Bingham v. Bingham, 149 S.W. 218.
S. D. Neill, of Indianola, for appellee.
The only...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rakestraw v. Rakestraw, No. 96-CA-01118
...See also Sandifer v. Sandifer, 215 Miss. 414, 61 So.2d 144 (1952); Smith v. Smith, 40 So.2d 156 (Miss.1949); Manning v. Manning, 160 Miss. 318, 133 So. 673 (1931). Because the whole of William's behavior was so consistently egregious over the entire 25 year relationship, we cannot fault the......
-
Gerty v. Gerty, NO. 2017-CP-00828-SCT
...not mend his or her ways and resumes the prior course of conduct, there is a revival of the grounds for divorce . Manning v. Manning , 160 Miss. 318, 321, 133 So. 673, 674 (1931).In practical effect, condonation places the offending spouse on a form of temporary probation. Any subsequent co......
-
Wood v. Wood, No. 56464
...does not mend his or her ways and resumes the prior course of conduct, there is a revival of the grounds for divorce. Manning v. Manning, 160 Miss. 318, 321, 133 So. 673, 674 In practical effect, condonation places the offending spouse on a form of temporary probation. Any subsequent conduc......
-
Chaffin v. Chaffin, No. 53837
...inhuman treatment is an offense of a continuing nature and is not condoned by the mere continuance of cohabitation. Manning v. Manning, 160 Miss. 318, 133 So. 673 (1931). But condonation of cruelty has been found where the parties separated and then resumed their marital relationship. Thame......
-
Rakestraw v. Rakestraw, No. 96-CA-01118
...See also Sandifer v. Sandifer, 215 Miss. 414, 61 So.2d 144 (1952); Smith v. Smith, 40 So.2d 156 (Miss.1949); Manning v. Manning, 160 Miss. 318, 133 So. 673 (1931). Because the whole of William's behavior was so consistently egregious over the entire 25 year relationship, we cannot fault the......
-
Gerty v. Gerty, NO. 2017-CP-00828-SCT
...not mend his or her ways and resumes the prior course of conduct, there is a revival of the grounds for divorce . Manning v. Manning , 160 Miss. 318, 321, 133 So. 673, 674 (1931).In practical effect, condonation places the offending spouse on a form of temporary probation. Any subsequent co......
-
Wood v. Wood, No. 56464
...does not mend his or her ways and resumes the prior course of conduct, there is a revival of the grounds for divorce. Manning v. Manning, 160 Miss. 318, 321, 133 So. 673, 674 In practical effect, condonation places the offending spouse on a form of temporary probation. Any subsequent conduc......
-
Chaffin v. Chaffin, No. 53837
...inhuman treatment is an offense of a continuing nature and is not condoned by the mere continuance of cohabitation. Manning v. Manning, 160 Miss. 318, 133 So. 673 (1931). But condonation of cruelty has been found where the parties separated and then resumed their marital relationship. Thame......