Ratcliff v. Ratcliff, No. 15782.

CourtCourt of Appeal of Missouri (US)
Writing for the CourtArnold
Citation288 S.W. 794
PartiesRATCLIFF v. RATCLIFF.
Docket NumberNo. 15782.
Decision Date06 December 1928
288 S.W. 794
RATCLIFF
v.
RATCLIFF.
No. 15782.
Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.
December 6, 1928.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Buchanan County; Sam Wilcox, Judge.

Suit for divorce by Nellie Ratcliff against Crawford Ratcliff. Decree for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Tibbels & Bridgeman, of Mound City, for appellant.

Harry M. Dungan, of Oregon, Mo., and Bastin & McNeely, of St. Joseph, for respondent.

ARNOLD, J.


This is an action for divorce, in which plaintiff by her original petition seeks to have adjudicated and determined the interests of the parties litigant to certain real estate and personal property. The suit was instituted in Holt county, Mo., but a change of venue was taken by each of the parties, and the cause finally was tried in division No. 1 of the Buchanan county circuit court at St. Joseph.

The facts developed are that the parties were married in Holt county on March 26, 1010. No children were born of the marriage. It appears that plaintiff is about 14 years the senior of defendant. Prior to the said marriage, plaintiff had lived on a farm in Holt county with her widowed mother. Defendant, a single man, then about 19 years of age, came to said county from the state of Virginia and entered the employ of plaintiff's mother as a farm hand. Both plaintiff and defendant had lived with plaintiff's mother on the farm for a period of about 18 years, when plaintiff's mother died. After the death of plaintiff's mother, the two continued to live on the farm for a year or two previous to their marriage and for a time thereafter. The evidence shows that at the time of the said marriage plaintiff was the owner of two tracts of land, one consisting of 80 acres and the other of 105 acres, both of which were incumbered. At this time defendant possessed a little property, probably a team or

288 S.W. 795

two and a few farm implements, but no real estate. After their marriage, the parties prospered, and within a few years had accumulated considerable personal property, and had paid off the incumbrances on plaintiff's lands.

It appears that in 1917 the parties acquired by purchase or trade a tract of 200 acres from one Fred Fleenor. Plaintiff's 80-acre tract, valued at $160 per acre, was exchanged for the 200-acre tract, which was also valued at $160 per acre; the difference being paid in cash. In order to raise the amount, a loan "of $6,700 was placed on plaintiff's 105-acre tract and a loan of $15,000 on the 200-acre farm obtained in the deal. The deed for the 200 acres from Fleenor was made to defendant and plaintiff as husband and wife, creating thereby an estate in the entirety in this tract. It is plaintiff's contention that defendant procured this deed to be so made without her knowledge or consent and for the purpose of defrauding her, and that the arrangement between her and defendant was that plaintiff was to have an interest in the 200 acres in excess of defendant's interest, in the amount of $12,800 which was the value of the 80-acre tract which went into the deal as part payment. After the purchase of the 200-acre tract, the parties moved from the 105-acre tract where they had been living, to the 200-acre farm and continued to reside thereon until their separation, at which time the indebtedness of $6,700 on the 105-acre tract had been paid. At the time of the separation, there were on the farm some 45 head of cattle and about 100 head of hogs, in which plaintiff claims she and defendant had an equal interest.

Some time in the fall of 1923, one Fred Wallace, who had been employed to gather corn, moved, with Jennie his wife, into a small house on the farm near the dwelling occupied by plaintiff and defendant. Wallace and his wife continued to live there until some time in December, when Fred Wallace left, and Jennie moved into the house occupied by plaintiff and defendant. Jennie remained a short time, and then went to Oklahoma, where she stayed for about two weeks, at which time plaintiff wrote her and sent money for her return to Holt county. It appears the defendant cannot write. Jennie returned in January, 1924, and went to the home of plaintiff and defendant, where she remained until the latter part of June that year, when she finally left. Plaintiff's testimony shows that adulterous relations between Jennie Wallace and defendant began in February, 1924, and continued daily until the latter part of June following. The house in which the parties resided consisted of four rooms, viz. two bedrooms, a kitchen, and another room, all being on the first floor. One bedroom at the southeast corner was occupied by plaintiff and defendant and the one at the southwest corner by Jennie Wallace; the two rooms having a communicating door. The kitchen was the northeast room, and, in going from the kitchen into the west bedroom, it was necessary to pass through the east bedroom.

Plaintiff testified that, when she would arise in the morning to build the tires and prepare breakfast, defendant would get out of his bed and go into the room occupied by Jennie and would get into bed with her; that she saw him do this from the latter part of February until the latter part of June, when plaintiff left home. It is in evidence that, when defendant went into the bedroom of Jennie Wallace, the door between the two rooms was always left open; that plaintiff would continue the preparation of breakfast, and when the meal was ready she would go into Jennie's bedroom and call her and defendant to breakfast. Plaintiff testified she remonstrated with defendant on his relations with Jennie and also had some mutual friends speak to him about it; that defendant became offended thereat and said she would only "make things worse." Considerable trouble developed between the parties over the woman, which resulted in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Frederick v. Frederick, No. 9024
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • January 14, 1971
    ...of itself to warrant a separation or divorce. J. v. K., Mo.App., 419 S.W.2d 461, 465(9, 10); Ratcliff v. Ratcliff, 221 Mo.App. 944, 949, 288 S.W. 794, True, plaintiff categorically denied that he had 'beaten' defendant, and the testimony of the parties with respect to various other matters ......
  • Rusche v. Rusche, No. 26949.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • March 18, 1947
    ...forgiveness. O'Neil v. O'Neil, Mo.App., 264 S.W. 61; Weber v. Weber, 195 Mo.App. 126, 189 S.W. 577; Ratcliff v. Ratcliff, 221 Mo.App. 944, 288 S.W. 794; Needham v. Needham, Mo.App., 299 S.W. 832. It presupposes that the offending party's marital obligations will thenceforth be observed; and......
  • Spainhower v. Spainhower, No. 33168
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • May 20, 1969
    ...the offender will thereafter 'treat the forgiving spouse in all respects with conjugal kindness.' Ratcliff v. Ratcliff, 221 Mo.App. 944, 288 S.W. 794, 796. In the event that the condition be violated the original grievance as a cause of divorce is revived although the subsequent act of mari......
  • Taylor v. Taylor, No. 6836.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • November 2, 1949
    ...O'Neil v. O'Neil, Mo.App., 264 S.W. 61; Weber v. Weber, 195 Mo.App. 126, 189 S.W. 577; Ratcliff v. Ratcliff, 221 Mo.App., 944, 288 S.W. 794; Needham v. Needham, Mo.App., 299 S.W. 832. It presupposes that the offending party's marital obligations will thenceforth be observed; and if a breach......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Frederick v. Frederick, No. 9024
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • January 14, 1971
    ...of itself to warrant a separation or divorce. J. v. K., Mo.App., 419 S.W.2d 461, 465(9, 10); Ratcliff v. Ratcliff, 221 Mo.App. 944, 949, 288 S.W. 794, True, plaintiff categorically denied that he had 'beaten' defendant, and the testimony of the parties with respect to various other matters ......
  • Rusche v. Rusche, No. 26949.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • March 18, 1947
    ...forgiveness. O'Neil v. O'Neil, Mo.App., 264 S.W. 61; Weber v. Weber, 195 Mo.App. 126, 189 S.W. 577; Ratcliff v. Ratcliff, 221 Mo.App. 944, 288 S.W. 794; Needham v. Needham, Mo.App., 299 S.W. 832. It presupposes that the offending party's marital obligations will thenceforth be observed; and......
  • Spainhower v. Spainhower, No. 33168
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • May 20, 1969
    ...the offender will thereafter 'treat the forgiving spouse in all respects with conjugal kindness.' Ratcliff v. Ratcliff, 221 Mo.App. 944, 288 S.W. 794, 796. In the event that the condition be violated the original grievance as a cause of divorce is revived although the subsequent act of mari......
  • Taylor v. Taylor, No. 6836.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • November 2, 1949
    ...O'Neil v. O'Neil, Mo.App., 264 S.W. 61; Weber v. Weber, 195 Mo.App. 126, 189 S.W. 577; Ratcliff v. Ratcliff, 221 Mo.App., 944, 288 S.W. 794; Needham v. Needham, Mo.App., 299 S.W. 832. It presupposes that the offending party's marital obligations will thenceforth be observed; and if a breach......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT