Steele v. Steele

• Decision Date: 15 January 1895
• Parties: STEELE v. STEELE.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

29 S.W. 17

96 Ky. 382

STEELE v. STEELE.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

January 15, 1895

Appeal from circuit court, Laurel county

"To be officially reported."

Action by Nannie Steele against Craig Steele. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Wm. H Holt, for appellant.

Ewell &amp Smith, for appellee.

LEWIS J.

Nannie Steele brought this action against her husband, Craig Steele for alimony for herself and infant child, upon the ground of abandonment and refusal to support them. His answer was made a counterclaim, in which he prayed for absolute divorce because, as alleged, their marriage was brought about by fraud of plaintiff and her friends; she being at the time without defendant's knowledge, pregnant by another man. The lower court rendered judgment dismissing his counterclaim, and for $500 in her favor for alimony. The evidence shows she was at the time pregnant; but he knew it, and we are satisfied is the father of the child for whose benefit the judgment was in part rendered. It appears that the father of plaintiff, when her condition was found out by him, had a personal interview with Craig Steele and his father on the subject, in which he stated that he believed defendant was author of his daughter's misfortune, and, if so, he ought to marry her. Craig Steele did not then deny, but admitted he was; and both he and his father agreed it was his duty to marry her, and they were married. But before the marriage took place there was another interview between plaintiff's father and Craig Steele and his father in reference to reports of her lewdness and unchastity previous to any sexual intercourse between her and Craig Steele. In that interview her father stated that if those reports, which he requested them to investigate, turned out to be true, he did not ask or expect him to marry her. To what extent they did then institute inquiry on that subject does not clearly appear. At all events, they professed to believe the reports were untrue, and not an obstacle to the marriage. About seven months after the marriage she gave birth to a child proved to be mature and fully developed. But her husband was not then, nor had for a month or more been, with his wife, though they resided at the house of his father from the time of the marriage, and the child was born there. There is enough in the record to show that Craig Steele had prior to birth of the child determined to abandon his wife, and the malignancy and pertinacity with which he and his relatives have during this litigation hunted testimony to...