Walker v. Walker
Decision Date | 20 October 1898 |
Citation | 51 N.E. 455,172 Mass. 82 |
Parties | WALKER v. WALKER. |
Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
E.H. Lathrop, for libelant.
E.C. Bumpus, for libelee.
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-
Walker v. Walker
...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 ......