Schwent v. Schwent
| Decision Date | 16 March 1948 |
| Docket Number | 27411 |
| Citation | 209 S.W.2d 546 |
| Parties | SCHWENT v. SCHWENT |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
'Not to be reported in State Reports.'
James E. Crowe, of St. Louis, for appellant.
Frank W. Tomasso, Montague Punch and Walter A. Hays, all of St Louis, for respondent.
HUGHES
On December 3, 1946, plaintiff filed suit against defendant alleging desertion and general indignities. Defendant answered by way of cross-bill alleging general indignities. After a trial on May 26th, and 27th, 1947, and on June 2 1947, a decree was rendered granting plaintiff a divorce and restoration of her maiden name and awarding plaintiff alimony in the amount of $ 20 per week, and, in addition to a prior award of $ 75 for attorney's fee, awarded plaintiff the further sum of $ 50 for her attorney's fee, and dismissed defendant's crossbill. After an unavailing motion for a new trial plaintiff has appealed to this court from the judgment as to the allowance of alimony and attorney's fee, and contends that the same was inadequate.
The defendant was a foreman in the employ of Sterling Aluminum Products Company, and the plaintiff's evidence shows that for the year 1946 his gross wages were $ 5,647.59, and for 1947 up to May 18th his gross wages were $ 2,256.23. What his net wages were after deducting necessary payments therefrom, such as federal and state income taxes, and social security taxes, and other expenses his job required, is not shown in the evidence. The wages for the week ending March 30, 1947, were shown to have been $ 88.94, which included $ 14.50 premium or overtime work, leaving his base wage for that week $ 74.44, and no showing as to deductions as above mentioned.
Defendant's evidence was that as foreman his wages were computed at so much per hour and based on the wages of the workmen under his supervision; so that if the workmen's wages were raised his wages would automatically be raised, and likewise if the workmen's wages were decreased his wages would automatically be decreased. It was further shown by the evidence that shortly before the trial the wages of the workmen had been materially reduced, and this reduction would automatically reduce defendant's wages materially. Defendant calculated that his wages after July 1, 1947, would be about $ 51 per week. No children were born of the marriage. During the marriage defendant bought a home, the original cost of which was $ 3,660, and the value at the time of the trial was $ 6,500 to $ 7,000, and that the title had been placed in both of their names, thus creating an estate by the entirety. During the first five or six years of the marriage the wife worked, but what her earnings were is not shown.
The court having awarded a decree of divorce to plaintiff and dismissed defendant's cross-bill, and that decree having become final, it settled the question as to who was the innocent and injured party during a somewhat turbulent marital relation, and therefore the mass of evidence offered by each side, other than as above set forth, has no bearing on the issue of alimony and attorney's fee other than such light as it might throw on the question of the amount necessary to support the wife according to her social standard and the comforts of life enjoyed by reason of the marital relation. A large part of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial