Sullivan v. Sullivan

• Decision Date: 13 March 1909
• Citation: 100 P. 321,52 Wash. 160
• Parties: SULLIVAN v. SULLIVAN.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

100 P. 321

52 Wash. 160

SULLIVAN v. SULLIVAN.

Supreme Court of Washington

March 13, 1909

Appeal from Superior Court, Skagit County; Geo. A. Joiner, Judge.

Action by Ella A. Sullivan against Daniel Sullivan. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Modified and affirmed.

See also, 49 Wash. 508, 95 P. 1095.

Million Houser & Shranger, for appellant.

Smith &amp Brawley, for respondent.

RUDKIN, C.J.

This was an action for divorce on the ground of cruel treatment and personal indignities rendering life burdensome. On the question of cruel treatment and personal indignities, the court made the following findings:

'That the said defendant is possessed of a sullen and at times ungovernable temper, and has at different times and occasions ill treated and abused plaintiff by calling her vile and abusive names, swearing and cursing at her and said children, and applying to each of them vile epithets, and thereafter, and for days and weeks at a time, the defendant would go about his home in this sullen manner without ever speaking to the plaintiff or any member of his family, and that as time went on the defendant became worse in his manner, and that for more than eight or nine years last past it has been only on rare occasions that he ever spoke to the said plaintiff, but that during all times he has not treated plaintiff as a husband should treat his wife.

'That during the fall of 1901, while the said plaintiff and defendant were living together as husband and wife at their home near the town of Edison, the said defendant became enraged at plaintiff, and said to her that she would soon be conducting a house of prostitution, and that there was no cause or provocation for such an accusation, and that since said time and by reason of the acts and misconduct of the defendant the plaintiff and defendant have not lived or cohabited together as husband and wife.

'That on or about the ___ day of _____, 1906, the said infant daughter of plaintiff and defendant was sick, and it became necessary under the advice of a physician to take her to the state of California, and plaintiff did take said daughter to said state, and on her returning to her home on the evening of June 27th of said year she found all the doors bolted, and, upon knocking at the door, the defendant opened the door, and, when he discovered that it was the plaintiff, he shut the door in her face.

'That on several occasions in the last seven years last past the defendant has ordered the plaintiff to leave his premises, and never to return.

'That on or about the 2d day of February, 1907, the said defendant without any cause or provocation whatsoever commenced to swear at, curse, and abuse the plaintiff by calling her vile and abusive names, and applying to her the term of 'whelp,' and did at said time direct plaintiff to quit and leave his premises.

'That during all the said married life the plaintiff has been a hard working woman, a true and loving wife, and has attempted in every way to get along with the said defendant, but that the said defendant has from time to time ill treated and abused her as aforesaid, and has failed to practically recognize her as his wife, and has so humiliated and ill treated her that he has rendered her life miserable, and the court finds it is not possible for said parties to live together as husband and wife.

'The court further finds that by reason of the ill treatment of plaintiff by defendant that she has lost all love and affection for him, and that defendant by reason of his disposition, cruel and inhuman treatment of plaintiff has no love or affection whatsoever for the said plaintiff.'

The court further found that the community property of the parties was of the value of $204,000, and that the defendant was possessed of separate property of the value of $20,000. On these and other formal findings a divorce was granted, and the plaintiff was awarded the care and custody of a minor daughter, and money and property of the aggregate value of $92,500, together with an attorney fee of $2,500. The residue of the property, of the aggregate value of $129,000, was awarded to the defendant. From this decree the defendant has appealed, and assigns as error the granting of the divorce, the disposition made of the property and property rights of the parties, and the allowance of the attorney fee.

The appellant has been an industrious, thrifty, hardworking man all his life, as is shown by his property accumulations. He was never of a very amiable disposition, and, as is usually the case, he grew more irritable and disagreeable as he grew older. The main difficulty between the husband and wife originated some 10 years ago over the control and management of their children, consisting of four daughters. They disagreed entirely as to the manner in which the children should be brought up, how they should dress, what they should do, when and where they should go and with whom. Their relations became so strained some seven years ago that the...