Rodely v. Rodely, 37521

• Decision Date: 27 May 1963
• Docket Number: No. 37521,37521
• Citation: 28 Ill.2d 347,192 N.E.2d 347
• Parties: Vivian Oleta RODELY, Appellant, v. George Frederick RODELY et al., Appellees.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

Page 347

192 N.E.2d 347 28 Ill.2d 347 Vivian Oleta RODELY, Appellant,
v.
George Frederick RODELY et al., Appellees. No. 37521. Supreme Court of Illinois. May 27, 1963.
As Modified on Denial of Rehearing Sept. 26, 1963.

[28 Ill.2d 348]

Page 348

Nick D. Vasileff, Madison, and Michael A. Plunkett, Du Quoin, for appellant.

F. Mark Miller, Du Quoin, and Hill & Hill, Benton, for appellees.

SOLFISBURG, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court of Perry County which granted a divorce and ordered the conveyance of real estate. The latter feature of the decree involves a freehold so as to give us jurisdiction of the direct appeal. James v. James, 14 Ill.2d 295, 298, 152 N.E.2d 582.

Alleging extreme and repeated cruelty, the plaintiff, Vivian O. Rodely, filed a complaint for divorce against George F. Rodely, defendant, wherein she prayed for: child custody, support and alimony, an accounting for the income from a jointly owned 160-acre farm where the parties had their residence, and that the said farm be awarded to her, or, in the alternative, that dower and homestead be set off to her and the land partitioned. Defendant filed a counterclaim for divorce on the ground of desertion, and by a separate count prayed for partition of the farm. After ordering that consideration of the count for partition in the counterclaim would be held in [28 Ill.2d 349] abeyance, a hearing was held on the other issues and a decree was entered which, among other things: (1) awarded plaintiff a divorce, after finding that she was without fault and that defendant was guilty of extreme and repeated cruelty; (2) awarded the custody three minor children to plaintiff and ordered that defendant pay $300 a month for their support; (3) fixed visitation rights permitting defendant to see the children; (4) held that plaintiff was not entitiled to an accounting of the farm income; and (5) awarded plaintiff alimony in gross in the sum of $15,000 on the condition that she convey to defendant her one-half interest in the jointly owned farm. By a subsequent supplemental decree, entered by consent, defendant was ordered to pay and discharge mortgage balances of $3,375 and $1,000, together with interest due, which were a lien on 120 acres of the farm and for which obligations the plaintiff jointly shared personal liability.

Plaintiff has appealed and her contentions are that the court erred: in denying her an accounting; in conditioning the gross alimony awarded upon the conveyance of her joint interest in the farm; in ignoring her prayer for partition; and in granting defendant visitation rights with a daughter, now six years old, outside the presence of plaintiff. Defendant filed a notice of a cross appeal, but has not pursued it by argument or citation of authority in the brief filed in this court and is deemed to have abandoned it. (People ex rel. Nelson v. Olympic Hotel Bldg. Corp., 405 Ill. 440, 451, 91 N.E.2d 597.) He has stated, as one theory of the case, that he should have been awarded a divorce on the ground of his wife's wilful desertion, but this contention may not be reviewed. Not only is his notice of cross appeal insufficient to present the question for review, but once again the point has not been...