Windham v. Windham, 4 Div. 909
| Decision Date | 13 May 1937 |
| Docket Number | 4 Div. 909 |
| Parties | WINDHAM v. WINDHAM. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied June 3, 1937
Appeal from Circuit Court, Russell County; J.S. Williams, Judge.
Bill for divorce by C.L. Windham against Willie Edna Windham, and cross-bill for separate maintenance by respondent. From a decree for complainant respondent appeals.
Affirmed in part, and in part reversed, rendered, and remanded.
Jacob A. Walker, of Opelika, for appellant.
A.L Patterson, of Phenix City, for appellee.
We agree with the contention of appellee's counsel that the evidence does not support the conclusion that the appellee Windham, brought about or procured the debauchery of his wife. It at most shows a bungling effort on his part aided by his cousin, Jones, to fabricate testimony upon which he hoped to procure a divorce from her. It wholly fails to show that she committed adultery with Jones, as charged in the bill. Any other conclusion is incompatible with the fact that Jones remained in the employ of appellee in a responsible position up to the time appellee testified as a witness in this case and he was not offered as a witness to support the charges made by the bill. Appellee elected to leave his case to rest upon the evidence which, when considered alone, at most raises a mere suspicion or conjecture. This is wholly insufficient under the authorities, especially in the face of the wife's testimony denying said charges, supported by evidence of her good character in the community where she had lived all her life. Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471, 158 So. 311.
The evidence shows that the complainant is a man of considerable means, owns rent property which he assesses, in round figures, at $25,000, and from which he receives $500 to $900 per month income; that the appellant, the wife, has incurred an expense of $500 as attorney's fee for the defense of this suit; and that she is without means. She was allowed temporary alimony of $50 per month and $250 solicitor's fee for prosecuting and for defending the suit. In this respect the decree of the circuit court is affirmed.
In all other respects the decree of the circuit court is reversed and one here rendered dismissing the complainant's bill and granting the defendant relief under her cross-bill. She is allowed as temporary alimony $50 per month as fixed in the report of the register up until June 1, 1937. Her permanent...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ryan v. Ryan, 6 Div. 893
...ruled correctly in holding it to be insufficient to prove adultery. We find no error in the dismissal of the cross-bill. Windham v. Windham, 234 Ala. 309, 174 So. 500; Chamblee v. Chamblee, 255 Ala. 35, 49 So.2d 917; Gardner v. Gardner, 248 Ala. 508, 28 So.2d 559; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 4......
-
Russell v. Russell
...the trial court. They have petitioned for allowance of fees on this appeal. The petition is granted in the sum of $270. Windham v. Windham, 234 Ala. 309, 174 So. 500; Ex parte Taylor, 251 Ala. 387, 37 So.2d 656; Sims v. Sims, 253 Ala. 307, 45 So.2d 25, 15 A.L.R.2d Attorneys for the interven......
-
Taylor v. Taylor
...Ala. 439, 199 So. 844; Williams v. Williams, 239 Ala. 162, 194 So. 507; Murray v. Murray, 238 Ala. 158, 189 So. 877, 878; Windham v. Windham, 234 Ala. 309, 174 So. 500; parte Allan, 220 Ala. 482, 125 So. 612; Heaton v. Davis, 216 Ala. 197, 112 So. 756. It is our opinion that the sum of $85 ......
-
Gardner v. Gardner
...215 Ala. 684, 112 So. 218; Pitchford v. Pitchford, 222 Ala. 612, 133 So. 718; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471, 158 So. 311; Windham v. Windham, 234 Ala. 309, 174 So. 500. testimony relative to the adultery of the wife creates at most a mere suspicion. She was seen talking to her alleged paramo......