Walker v. Walker

Decision Date20 October 1898
Citation51 N.E. 455,172 Mass. 82
PartiesWALKER v. WALKER.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
COUNSEL

E.H. Lathrop, for libelant.

E.C. Bumpus, for libelee.

OPINION

BARKER, J.

If, as the libelee contends, the letter of the libelant to him of December 15, 1891, with her subsequent conduct until he committed adultery in the year 1892, was a desertion, which, if continued for three years, would have given him ground for divorce, the libelant yet had a locus penitentiae, and under our decisions, after the adultery of the libelee, was under no obligation to return to him, and he cannot set up the desertion in bar of her libel for his adultery committed before her desertion had continued so long as to give him a right to a divorce. Hall v. Hall, 4 Allen, 41; Clapp v. Clapp, 97 Mass. 531. See, also, Handy v. Handy, 124 Mass. 394; Cumming v. Cumming, 135 Mass. 386, 389; Morrison v. Morrison, 142 Mass. 361, 8 N.E. 59; Watts v. Watts, 160 Mass. 464, 467, 36 N.E. 479. Exceptions overruled.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Walker v. Walker
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • October 20, 1898
    ...172 Mass. 8251 N.E. 455WALKERv.WALKER.Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Hampshire.Oct. 20, Exceptions from superior court, Hampshire county; Francis A. Gaskill, Judge. Libel by Mary N. Walker against Myron P. Walker for divorce. There was decree nisi for libelant, and libelee brings ......

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