Mecha v. Mecha

• Decision Date: 03 October 1967
• Citation: 36 Wis.2d 29,152 N.W.2d 923
• Parties: Helen MECHA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard B. MECHA, Defendant-Respondent.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Page 923

152 N.W.2d 923

36 Wis.2d 29

Helen MECHA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard B. MECHA, Defendant-Respondent.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Oct. 3, 1967.

Murphy & Brady, Manitowoc, for appellant.

Smith, Harlow & Knab, Manitowoc, and Walther & Burns, Milwaukee David L. Walther, Milwaukee, of counsel, for respondent.

HANSEN, Justice.

The only question on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the findings and judgment of the trial court.

The trial court in its findings of fact and conclusions of law determined that the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant was guilty of cruel and inhuman treatment and thereupon dismissed the action.

This court, in the case of Heffernan v. Heffernan (1965), 27 Wis.2d 307, 310--313, 134 N.W.2d 439, reviewed a number of cases wherein 'cruel and inhuman treatment' had been considered and after reviewing these cases concluded (p. 312, 134 N.W.2d p. 442):

'From these cases we conclude that no precisely described or enumerated acts of one spouse toward another can be defined as cruel and inhuman treatment. In order to constitute cruel and inhuman treatment, such as to warrant the granting of a divorce or a divorce or a legal separation, the court must consider the totality of conduct and the detrimental effect it has upon necessary marital relationships and its grave effect upon the health of the other spouse. The conduct of the offending spouse must be unreasonable and unwarranted, it must render the parties incapable of performing their marital effect upon the physical or mental health of the offended spouse. In applying these tests the court should be cognizant of the desirable public policy in maintenance of marriage and family. The court may properly consider the age of the parties, the duration of the marriage, and presence and age of the children and the probability of delinquency, and the duties, and it must have a detrimental children.'

The foregoing ruling of this court on the question of what constitutes cruel and inhuman treatment under the statutes is quoted with approval in a more recent case of Gauer v. Gauer (1967), 34 Wis.2d 451, 454, 149 N.W.2d 533, 534.

The plaintiff also contends that the conduct of the defendant toward her constituted calculated cruelty. Among other things, she supports this by his expression toward her of the 'silent treatment' and such acts as his turning on the television to excessive volume when she attempted to sleep. An examination of the entire record confirms that these actions did not constitute calculated cruelty.

It is true that a sullen, morose and fretful temperament and disposition may make a spouse very uncompanionable, but it does not follow that the exhibition of those qualities in the temperament of a person is necessarily cruel and inhuman treatment within the meaning of the statute. Johnson v. Johnson (1900), 107 Wis. 186, 83 N.W. 291.

As heretofore stated, one of the difficulties that developed in this marriage centers around the association of the plaintiff with certain neighbors. She contends this association did not or should not have created problems. However, an examination of the record documents by admission of both parties that this association was the source of much of their...