Roy v. Roy

• Decision Date: 24 March 1922
• Docket Number: No. 5570.,5570.
• Citation: 116 A. 283
• Parties: ROY v. ROY.
• Court: Rhode Island Supreme Court

116 A. 283

ROY

v. ROY.

No. 5570.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

March 24, 1922.

Exceptions from Superior Court, Providence and Bristol Counties; Edward W. Blodgett, Judge.

Suit by Wilhelmina Roy against Levi J. Roy for divorce. Decree for petitioner, and respondent brings exceptions. Exceptions sustained, with permission to show cause why case should not be remitted, with direction to dismiss.

See, also, 116 Atl. 581.

Pettine & De Pasquale, of Providence, for petitioner.

Walling & Walling and Cooney & Cooney, all of Providence, for respondent.

VINCENT, J. On March 20, 1920, Wilhelmina Roy filed her petition in the superior court against her husband, Levi J. Roy, praying for a divorce from bed and board and from future cohabitation, and for an allowance for support and maintenance until such time as the parties should become reconciled. The petition was heard in the superior court, and a decision rendered for the petitioner, granting her a divorce from bed and board and future cohabitation with the respondent, etc. The case is now before us upon the respondent's exceptions: (1) To the refusal of the trial court to dismiss the petition; (2) to the refusal of the court to admit certain testimony offered by the respondent; and (3) to the decision of the trial court granting the prayer of the petition.

It appears that the marital discords and dissensions of this couple have been brought to the attention of the superior court upon two previous occasions. In July, 1914, the respondent here filed a petition for divorce which was heard and denied. On February 8, 1919, he filed another petition, which was also heard and denied.

In connection with the lastmentioned petition of Levi J. Roy, the respondent, now the petitioner here, filed a motion for an allowance for support and for witness and counsel fees. After a hearing "on oral testimony and agreements of counsel" a decree was entered, March 1, 1919, ordering the petitioner to pay to the respondent certain sums of money, including $15 per week for her support beginning on March 3, 1919. On July 10, 1919, this second petition of Levi J. Roy was denied and dismissed. It is undisputed that Mrs. Roy received $15 per week between March 3, 1919, and July 10, 1919, in accordance with the terms of the decree before referred to.

There is some contention now, in the case at bar, as to whether the payments of Mr. Roy in the prior suit were voluntary or involuntary. The respondent claims that they were voluntary, and therefore were like any other expenditures for the benefit of the petitioner. On the other hand, the petitioner...