Michels v. Michels

• Decision Date: 01 November 1921
• Citation: 115 A. 161
• Parties: MICHELS v. MICHELS.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

115 A. 161

MICHELS

v. MICHELS.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

Nov. 1, 1921.

Exceptions from Supreme Judicial Court, Cumberland County, at Law.

Libel for divorce by Alice G. Michels against Clarence E. Michels. Decree for libelant and libelee excepts. Exceptions overruled.

Argued before CORNISH, C. J., and SPEAR, HANSON, DUNN, MORRILL, and DEASY, JJ.

William Lyons, of Westbrook, for libelant.

W. R. & E. S. Anthoine, of Portland, for libelee.

CORNISH, C. J. Libel for divorce heard by a jury, who found in favor of the libelant on the allegation of cruel and abusive treatment. The Presiding Justice thereupon entered a decree of divorce, granting the custody of the two minor children to the mother, and ordering the payment of money for their support. To the entering of the decree the libelee filed exceptions. The question presented is whether as a matter of law the evidence, which is made a part of the exceptions, warrants the decree. Sweet v. Sweet, 119 Me. 81, 109 Atl. 379; or, expressed in another form, whether as a matter of law taking the lads disclosed in the evidence for the libelant as true, they gave her an absolute right to a divorce. Freeborn v. Freeborn, 168 Mass. 50, 46 N. E. 428.

"Cruel and abusive treatment" are words of comprehensive meaning, and the charge covers a wide range of conduct. Hoiyoke v. Holyoke, 78 Me. 404, 6 Atl. 827. The outstanding fact upon which the libelant places great emphasis in the case is the attempt of the libelee to have her committed to the State Hospital for the Insane. On May 19, 1919, the husband made the necessary application to the municipal officers of Old Orchard, where the wife was then residing with her children, charging that she was insane, and praying for her commitment to the Augusta State Hospital. Notice was thereupon ordered upon the wife, a hearing was held on May 21, 1919, and the testimony of two physicians who made an examination of her was taken, both of whom testified that in their opinion she was not insane. Other evidence was also given on both sides.

At the conclusion of the public hearing the proceedings were dismissed by the municipal officers. This unsuccessful charge of insanity, with its attendant publicity, might or might not constitute cruel and abusive treatment. It depends upon the motive which prompted the institution of the proceedings. If the application, although unsuccessful, was made in good faith, in the honest and sincere belief that the wife was in such an unsettled mental condition that her own good and that of her family required confinement and treatment in such an institution, such an act would be regarded as lacking entirely the...