Rast v. Rast

• Decision Date: 16 December 1896
• Citation: 113 Ala. 319,21 So. 34
• Parties: RAST v. RAST.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

21 So. 34

113 Ala. 319

RAST v. RAST.

Supreme Court of Alabama

December 16, 1896

Appeal from city court of Montgomery; W. S. Thorington, Judge.

Action by William T. Rast against Mary E. Rast for divorce. Decree for complainant, who appeals from the allowance of temporary and permanent alimony. Affirmed.

In this case the bill was by the husband against the wife, filed on the 30th of September, 1895, for a divorce on account of the alleged abandonment of the wife, and a final decree was rendered on the 30th of January, 1896. The wife filed her answer, and made it a cross bill against the complainant praying for a divorce in her favor, and asking for temporary and permanent alimony and counsel fees. On the 3d of December, 1895, the defendant moved the court to grant an order of reference to the register to ascertain what would be a suitable amount of alimony to the wife out of the estate of the husband pending the suit, and what amount would be a reasonable fee to be allowed her solicitor, for conducting the litigation in her behalf. The cause was submitted on that motion, and the court at the same term ordered the register to hold such reference and ascertain (1) whether the defendant Mary E. Rast, had a separate estate, and if so whether the same was sufficient for her support, pending the litigation; (2) whether the complainant had any estate, and if so, its amount, and the annual income derived from the same; (3) what amount should be allowed the wife as alimony pending the suit; and (4) what amount should be allowed the counsel for services in the litigation. This reference was executed by the register, on the 14th of January, 1896, and he filed his report on the same day. On this reference, the evidence taken by depositions in the cause were submitted and other witnesses were examined. The evidence tended to show, that complainant owned 200 acres of land, variously estimated as worth, with the improvements, from $5 to $15 per acre; mortgages and notes for $835, not worth their full face value; farming utensils, household and kitchen furniture, a horse, a few cows and hogs, corn and fodder; that complainant is an industrious, hard-working man, free of debt, was a good farmer, and lived comfortably for one of his means. The evidence also shows, that they are each illiterate and of humble social rank. Some of the witnesses estimated complainant's estate to be worth from $2,500 to $4,000. It may be stated, however, that it does not very satisfactorily appear what was its real value, nor what the annual income from it was. The register found and reported the value of the estate to be from $3,000 to $3,500; that his income was about $400 a year; and that $12.50 per month pending the litigation, was reasonable temporary alimony with $40 allowance for solicitor's fee. Upon the submission of the cause for final decree, on exceptions to the register's report and upon pleadings and proof, the court rendered a decree in which the exceptions to the register's report were overruled, and in which it was adjudged that the complainant was entitled to the relief prayed for, and that the bonds of matrimony between him and his wife be dissolved, on the ground that the respondent had voluntarily abandoned the complainant for more than two years preceding the filing of the bill. From this decree the complainant appeals, and assigns as error the overruling of the exceptions to the register's report, the allowance of alimony pendente lite, and the allowance of counsel fees, and the fixing of the permanent alimony. The court...