Ridge v. Ridge
| Decision Date | 04 November 1942 |
| Docket Number | No. 25670.,25670. |
| Parties | RIDGE v. RIDGE. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Hannibal Court of Common Pleas, Marion County; E. L. Alford, Judge.
"Not to be reported in State Reports."
Action by Gus Ridge against Katherine Ridge for divorce. From a judgment for the plaintiff, the defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Roy Hamlin, of Hannibal, for appellant.
Rendlen & White, of Hannibal, for respondent.
This suit for divorce was filed by respondent, as plaintiff, against his wife in the Hannibal Court of Common Pleas. Following a trial, the court made and entered a finding and judgment in favor of plaintiff awarding him a divorce from defendant. After an ineffectual motion for a new trial, defendant duly appealed.
Plaintiff and defendant were married in Muskogee, Oklahoma, on the 10th of June, 1909. They lived together as husband and wife from said date until August, 1936, since which time they have lived separate and apart from each other.
The petition of plaintiff alleged that defendant subjected plaintiff to such indignities as to render his condition intolerable in that she continually and habitually throughout their married life fussed, nagged and quarreled at plaintiff, cursed and swore at him, called him all manner of vile, wicked and profane names; that defendant frequently threatened and still threatens to take the life of plaintiff so that he lives in constant fear that she will carry out that threat; that she repeatedly charged plaintiff with infidelity to his marriage vows without any foundation in truth or in fact; that defendant steadfastly refused marital relations with plaintiff for several years; that she continually disturbed plaintiff in his work and in his efforts to get work; that defendant has abandoned plaintiff without reasonable cause therefor for the space of more than one whole year next before the filing of the petition; that three children were born of the marriage, all of whom are of age except Mary Elizabeth Ridge who was eighteen years old on November 7, 1939.
The answer of defendant, after admitting the date of the marriage, the separation, and birth of the children as pleaded in plaintiff's petition, denied each and every other allegation in said petition.
Defendant contends that the court erred in finding the issues for plaintiff and against her; that the burden of proof was on plaintiff to prove the allegations of his petition by a preponderance of the evidence, which he failed to do.
It is true, as defendant asserts, that it is the duty of an appellate court to review the evidence on appeal in a divorce suit and enter such judgment as the trial court should have entered. Grove v. Grove, 79 Mo.App. 142; Friedmeyer v. Friedmeyer, Mo.App., 194 S.W. 746; Stephan v. Stephan, Mo.App., 242 S.W. 425.
Plaintiff, at the time of the trial, was 54 years of age. He was born in Hannibal, Missouri, and lived most of his life in that city. He was away from the city a few times doing work elsewhere, and was away in Army service during the first World War. He was a member of the Missouri National Guard and also of the American Legion. After the first World War he had charge of recruiting duty for the northern half of Missouri for the Missouri National Guard. For many years plaintiff was in the employ of the Atlas Portland Cement Company at its plant south of Hannibal, Missouri. A part of the time he was a foreman.
Plaintiff testified that, during the first part of their married life, he and defendant got along well, but that, beginning about the time of the depression, there came a rift in their relations and he couldn't get along with defendant because she nagged at him; that during the last years of their married life she cursed him and called him vile names many, many times; that this would happen sometimes once a week and at other times it would not happen for a month; that he never did curse her; that several times she called him vile names, cursed him and threatened that if he didn't get away she would kill him. He was asked if he believed she would do that sort of thing and answered: "Yes, sir." When asked what her condition was when she made such threats and used the vile language to him, he answered: "Well, generally, she appeared to have been drinking." He further testified that one time about a year and a half before the trial he was called up to the house in Hannibal where defendant was living after their separation, having been told that his daughter was in the house and that defendant wouldn't let her out; that when he went into the house defendant cursed him; that she called him several vile names. Plaintiff stated the vile names but we think it is unnecessary to set them forth here. Plaintiff further testified that when he came to the house defendant was very much under the influence of liquor; that she demanded that he get out of the house; that he tried to ask her what the trouble was and why all the noise, but she kept cursing him and calling for the daughter to call the police and have him arrested; that he tried to quiet her down and eventually she grabbed him, tore his shirt and almost pulled it off of him; that he grabbed her wrist and sat her down on the bed and told his daughter to call the police; that during all that time defendant was swearing and cursing at him and calling him vile names; that he did not use any such language towards her; that while he was there on that occasion Police Officer Ben Phillips of the City of Hannibal came there and asked what was the matter, and defendant jumped up, and, referring to plaintiff, told the officer: "If you don't take this s___ of a b___ out of here I will kill him"; that defendant on that occasion made so much noise that Officer Phillips had to tell her to shut up and keep still; that the daughter at that time was sixteen years of age, and that he and the daughter left with the police officer.
Plaintiff further testified that, prior to the separation, for a period of four or five years defendant refused to sustain marital relations with him. Asked as to the manner in which the separation came about, plaintiff testified that in August, 1936, he got out of work and didn't have any money; that he was picking up whatever jobs he could find regardless of what kind of labor it was, and after a time he even ran out of that; that he was living at home; that he went into the store which his wife owned to get potatoes to eat; that he picked up two potatoes and his wife followed him and told him those potatoes were golden money to her, to put them down and get to hell out of there, and that "she was not going to feed me and that was when I left."
Plaintiff further testified that his employer sent him to Texas where he was a foreman and had a good job; that defendant cursed him while they were down there but it was not as bad there as it became in later years; that while they were there she would wake him up seven, eight, ten or twelve times during the night begging him to bring her back to Hannibal; that he was then working fourteen hours a day and that the strain of no rest and lots of work caused him to start drinking and to lose his job; that they then came back to Missouri where he went to work for the City of Hannibal and had not been drinking for two years.
On cross-examination plaintiff testified that he received a bonus of $743 from his service in the Army in the World War; that he gave defendant $200 of that sum and shortly thereafter made a trip to St. Joseph, Kansas City and Jefferson City, Missouri, where he went to see former officers and associates he knew during the war; that he was away on that trip about a week; that after he came back he and his wife had a quarrel over that matter. At this point plaintiff testified on cross-examination as follows:
The testimony on behalf of plaintiff further shows that, after plaintiff and defendant separated in August, 1936, and while plaintiff was employed as foreman at the "City Barn", defendant called him on the telephone numerous times and cursed him and called him vile names. Smith Phillips, a fellow workman of plaintiff at the "City Barn", testified that six or seven times a day calls would come over the telephone for plaintiff from a woman; that when plaintiff answered the phone he would not argue and used no violent tones, and did not use any profane or vulgar language to the person talking to plaintiff on the phone.
Allen Robinson, who also worked with plaintiff for three years at the "City Barn", gave testimony corroborating plaintiff's testimony with respect to the number of telephone calls for plaintiff while he would be at his work; that one time plaintiff was talking with someone on the telephone but quit talking and hung up the phone, but the phone rang immediately thereafter and the witness answered the phone; that there was a woman on the other end of the line who gave the witness a "cussing." The court asked the witness what the woman on the other end of the telephone said. The witness answered: "She called me a G___ d___ s___ of a b___", and stated that the woman went on cursing about something; that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Fawkes v. Bland
...this court to review the evidence and make its own findings. Kister v. Kister, 89 S.W.2d 106; Bowzer v. Bowzer, 236 Mo.App. 514; Ridge v. Ridge, 165 S.W.2d 294. S. McClintock and Arthur L. Quant for respondents. (1) Appellate court will pay deference to findings of trial court on conflictin......
-
Scott v. Scott
...S.W.2d 414; Galst v. Galst, 188 S.W.2d 843; Bowers v. Bowers, 225 Mo.App. 1197, 35 S.W.2d 39; Stevens v. Stevens, 158 S.W.2d 238; Ridge v. Ridge, 165 S.W.2d 294; Tate v. Tate, 227 Mo.App. 1141, 59 S.W.2d 790; Willett v. Willett, 196 S.W. 1058; Nolker v. Nolker, (Mo.) 257 S.W. 798; Howard v.......
-
L v. N
...782(6); Politte v. Politte, Mo.App., 230 S.W.2d 142, 148(4); Rowland v. Rowland, Mo.App., 227 S.W.2d 478, 484(2, 3); Ridge v. Ridge, Mo.App., 165 S.W.2d 294, 300(10); Tebbe v. Tebbe, 223 Mo.App. 1106, 21 S.W.2d 915, 918(4).5 Paxton v. Paxton, Mo.App., 319 S.W.2d 280, 288(10); McKenzie v. Mc......
-
Boudinier v. Boudinier
...and justice of the matters in question. Kistner v. Kistner, 89 S.W.2d 106; Bowzer v. Bowzer, 236 Mo.App. 514, 155 S.W.2d 530; Ridge v. Ridge, 165 S.W.2d 294. The court to the great prejudice of defendant in refusing to permit defendant's expert witness, Dr. Gerald W. Barry, to state, in ans......