Sullivan v. Sullivan, 136

Decision Date03 April 1952
Docket NumberNo. 136,136
Citation199 Md. 594,87 A.2d 604
PartiesSULLIVAN v. SULLIVAN (two cases).
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

John Sumner Wood, Rockville, for appellant.

John R. Reeves, Bethesda, for appellee.

Before MARBURY, C. J., and DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, HENDERSON and MARKELL, JJ.

DELAPLAINE, Judge.

Carrie Miller Sullivan entered suit in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County against her husband, Kenneth Thomas Sullivan, for limited divorce, alimony, and custody of their three children, alleging cruelty and constructive desertion. Her husband filed a cross-bill for a limited divorce on the ground of desertion. The chancellor entered a decree (1) granting the husband a limited divorce, (2) awarding the wife the custody of the three children, and (3) ordering the husband to pay $425 per month for their support and education. The wife appealed from the divorce award, the husband from the custody award.

The parties were married in Washington in 1931. At the time of their separation on June 4, 1950, they were residing on Kenwood Avenue in the fashionable Chevy Chase section near Washington. Complainant is 47, and her husband 45. Their children are Robert, born in 1932, John, born in 1937, and Kenneth, born in 1941. Both of the parties have been heavy drinkers, and their life has been turbulent for many years. The pattern of their life was displayed in 1935, when defendant's intoxication in a night club in New York unnerved his wife, and shortly afterwards they had a repetition of the experience in Florida.

Complainant testified that in 1938 her husband was so abusive that on several occasions she had to leave the house and take refuge with friends.

Complainant further testified that in December, 1939, she accompanied her husband to a convention in Baltimore, and after he became intoxicated he beat her, and she took another room and called a doctor.

There was some dispute as to the details of the celebration of Christmas eve, 1945. Robert testified that his father went into his mother's room and tried to choke her. He said that his aunt ran him out of the room. The aunt, however, denied the story.

There was another harrowing occasion in 1947. Defendant testified that his wife went out for some drinks, and when she returned she went on one of her tirades, and took Kenneth into her room and locked the door. Defendant further testified that since complainant was raving and cursing, and Kenneth, who was then 6, was crying, he entered her room through a window to get the boy so that he could put him to bed. Complainant called the police. Defendant asserted that she tried to strike and kick him, but she finally quieted down and went to bed.

Another episode occurred on Labor Day, 1948. Defendant testified that when they arrived home that night from the club, his wife called Robert, then 16, to come downstairs and beat him up, but he convinced Robert that his mother was drunk.

By this time Robert had turned definitely against his father. It appeared that during the summer, when complainant was in a sanitarium, defendant scolded Robert about staying out late at night. On November 19, 1948, when Robert returned home very late, defendant got out of bed and met him at the door. A scuffle ensued between father and son, and the son's fist went through the glass window of the door.

Three days after defendant's altercation with his son, complainant filed a suit for a limited divorce, but the case was dismissed several weeks later and complainant resumed cohabitation with defendant.

In February, 1949, complainant filed her second suit for a limited divorce, but that suit likewise was dismissed and again she resumed cohabitation.

In the summer of 1949 defendant took his wife and children on a vacation to Rehoboth Beach. Complainant testified that while at the resort her husband struck her on the chest. The boys testified that they saw the bruise.

The next altercation was on New Year's eve. Complainant testified that after they returned home from their celebration at the club, defendant grabbed her and was starting to choke her when Robert came to her rescue. Defendant explained that his wife was drunk, and that when they arrived home she fell out of the automobile, and after he picked her up, she fell a second time. He picked her up again and carried her up the front porch. While he was unlocking the door, she hit him on the head with one of her shoes, and began screaming for Robert and shouting that his father was trying to kill her. Defendant declared that Robert knocked him unconscious.

The next altercation came on May 13, 1950. Defendant testified that while he was discussing some problems with his wife, she threw a kitchen utensil at him. Robert, then 18, rushed in and knocked his father over the kitchen sink. Defendant escaped into the living room, but Robert pursued him and struck him on the chest, knocking him over the table.

The climax came on the night of June 4, 1950. Complainant took the boys out to supper, and after they returned defendant went out. When he arrived home, he went to his wife's room, and she ordered him to get out. He complained to her that she was not properly attending to her household duties. He also warned her: 'I can't have you sicking Bob on me and making him believe I am going to strike you.' Angered by the reproof, his wife exclaimed: 'I am going to have you arrested, and I am going to make you get out of this house.' Again she screamed to the boys for help, shouting that their father was going to kill her. He locked the door as his wife advanced toward him. The boys pounded on the door, and he decided to let them in. Just as he was opening the door, his wife threw an ash tray at him and hit him on the head. Defendant testified: 'I just turned around with the children on one arm, and I slapped her under the chin. She went over on the bed.' His wife summoned the police. Two policemen arrived and took her to the police station, where she swore out a warrant for her husband's arrest for assault and battery. It was then that complainant left her husband, the boys going with her. Defendant stayed in the house several days and then went on a western trip. On June 9, 1950, complainant filed the instant suit. She moved back into the house and stayed there until the first of September. When she moved out, defendant moved in.

We are unwilling to reverse that part of the decree which grants the divorce to defendant. We have always adhered to the rule that sallies of passion, rudeness, and the use of abusive and profane language do not constitute cruelty as a ground for divorce. Hastings v. Hastings, 147 Md. 177, 181, 127 A. 743; Short v. Short, 151 Md. 444, 135 A. 176; McKane v. McKane, 152 Md. 515, 137 A. 288; Wendel v. Wndel, 154 Md. 11, 139 A. 573; Bonwit v. Bonwit, 169 Md. 189, 181 A. 237; Faulkner v. Faulkner, 176 Md. 692, 4 A.2d 117. Although there were a number of altercations when complainant slapped and kicked at her husband and he fought back, it is significant that in 1948 she dismissed her first suit for divorce and returned to her husband and resumed cohabitation, and in 1949 she dismissed her second suit and again returned to her husband...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Ricketts v. Ricketts
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • July 28, 2006
    ...on the ground of constructive desertion, even though the conduct may not justify a divorce on the ground of cruelty. Sullivan v. Sullivan, , 87 A.2d 604, 607 [(1952)]. Any misconduct of the husband will justify the wife in leaving him when it makes it impossible for her to live with him wit......
  • Adoption/Guardianship No. 3598, in Circuit Court for Harford County, In re
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1995
    ...v. Kerber, 240 Md. 312, 316-17, 214 A.2d 164 (1965); Thurlow v. Thurlow, 212 Md. 222, 227, 129 A.2d 170 (1957); Sullivan v. Sullivan, 199 Md. 594, 600-01, 87 A.2d 604 (1952); Fantasy Valley Resort, Inc. v. Gaylord Fuel Corp., 92 Md.App. 267, 275, 607 A.2d 584, cert. denied, 328 Md. 237, 614......
  • Das v. Das
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • June 28, 2000
    ...the conduct may not justify a divorce on the ground of cruelty." Scheinin, 200 Md. at 290, 89 A.2d 609 (citing Sullivan v. Sullivan, 199 Md. 594, 601, 87 A.2d 604 (1952)); see also Painter v. Painter, 113 Md.App. 504, 529, 688 A.2d 479 (1997) ("Due to the seriousness of the problem of domes......
  • Scheinin v. Scheinin
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • June 12, 1952
    ...v. Porter, 168 Md. 296, 177 A. 464; Hyatt v. Hyatt, 173 Md. 693, 196 A. 317; Miller v. Miller, 185 Md. 79, 42 A.2d 915;Sullivan v. Sullivan, Md., 87 A.2d 604, 606. Ordinarily a single act of violence slight in character does not constitute cruelty of treatment as a cause for divorce. Hoshal......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT