Randazzo v. Randazzo

• Decision Date: 02 January 1922
• Docket Number: No. 16809.,16809.
• Parties: RANDAZZO v. RANDAZZO
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

236 S.W. 1061

RANDAZZO v. RANDAZZO

No. 16809.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

January 2, 1922.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Wilson A. Taylor, Judge.

"Not to be officially published."

Action for divorce by Marie Love Randazzo against Joseph N. Randazzo. Decree of dismissal, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Hudson & Hudson, of St. Louis, for appellant.

Jas. C. Shaner, of St. Louis, for respondent.

DAUES, C.

This is an action for divorce, instituted in the circuit court of the city of St. Louis on the 8th day of August, 1918. Plaintiff alleges that a common-law marriage existed between her and the defendant. The grounds for divorce alleged are intolerable indignities. The answer is a general denial. The decree of the circuit court, rendered November 18, 1918, dismissed plaintiff's bill at her cost. Plaintiff appeals.

The main controversy in the case is whether, in fact, there was a marriage between the parties. On this issue the record evidence affords us the following information:

Plaintiff testified that for three years prior to her marriage to defendant she lived in adultery with him; that she was at that time the wife of one F. W. Poe; that she informed the defendant of her marital ties to Poe; that the defendant during the course of this libidinous relationship frequently asked plaintiff whether she was free from Poe, and that she would answer, "No; not yet"; defendant promised that when the divorce eventuated he would marry plaintiff; that about January 1, 1917, Poe divorced plaintiff; that she informed defendant of Poe's success in the divorce suit against her, whereupon the defendant again said he would marry plaintiff, "but not now"; that on the night of January 7, 1917, defendant returned and said, "It is not necessary that we go through the court and the ceremony, because here in this state that is all that is necessary; right here they merely agree to become man and wife; I will take you as my wife, and I am your husband, and nothing will part us to death," to which plaintiff replied, "Yes," and defendant responded, "Remember this to death."

At this juncture one Viola Kelley, also known as Mrs. Sass, herself twice divorced and three times married, came to the door of the room where the foregoing conversation is said to have occurred, and exclaimed, "Oh, I heard this agreement."

Mrs. Sass, testifying on behalf of the plaintiff, relates the circumstances as follows: That plaintiff had been rooming with her for three years prior to the date of this alleged marriage, and that defendant was a constant visitor of plaintiff; that she did act object to plaintiff bringing a man to leer room end entertaining him there, saying, "I rented the rooms and it was immaterial to me what they did." Mrs. Sass testified, that on the night the marriage was said to have been consummated she was in the adjoining room; that the door between the rooms was closed, but that there wee a one-inch crevice remaining open in the transom above the door, and that she heard defendant ask plaintiff if she was free from her "other husband," and that when she Kid she was he said they could be "common-law man and wife; it would tie them as good together as if they had had one dozen priests to marry them; something on that order I heard"; that both of the parties then told the witness that they were married.

Proceeding to the events subsequent to the night of the alleged marriage, plaintiff testified that from this date she went by the name of Randazzo. She admits that once before she adopted the name Randazzo under the belief that Poe had divorced her, but, when she discovered that no divorce had been granted Poe, she dropped the name of Randazzo.

Plaintiff testified that on one occasion after the alleged marriage she went to defendant's place of business and informed him of her delicate condition; that defendant Insisted that she be illegally operated upon, and that when she protested a controversy arose, and a pistol which she was carrying in her handbag was discharged. Plaintiff says she went to Oklahoma about March, 1918, though this date is disputed, where the operation above referred to resulted. She testified that this was her third experience of this kind resulting from her relationship with defendant.

Returning from Oklahoma after a few months, she lived with the defendant at the Model Hotel in St. Louis for ten days, registering there under the name of John Raymond and wife, and it is then that defendant is alleged to have offered plaintiff certain indignities, accusing her of faithlessness, and quarreling with her, and refusing to provide for her, and that he fought her. She further testified that defendant was earning $200 a month, and that he was worth between $12,000 and $15,000, from which she asks allowance for support and alimony.

Several witnesses testified for plaintiff that she went by the name of Randazzo, and that the defendant had rented and paid foe rooms used by them, and that he had paid other obligations incurred by plaintiff under the name of Randazzo, and that the defendant had ordered and provided for certain household expenses of plaintiff, and that h...