Wires v. Wires, 47588
| Decision Date | 29 July 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 47588,47588 |
| Parties | Mary Summerford WIRES v. Harold O. WIRES. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Williams & Williams, Joe H. Montgomery, Poplarville, for appellant.
Stewart & Burks, Picayune, for appellee.
This is a divorce case. The husband Harold O. Wires filed suit for divorce against his wife, Mary Summerford Wires, in the Chancery Court of Pearl River County, Mississippi. He charged his wife with cruel and inhuman treatment. Mrs. Wires answered the original bill in which she denied the charges. She then filed a cross-bill praying for separate maintenance. The chancellor granted a divorce to the husband but allowed alimony to the wife.
The issue on appeal is whether or not the complainant/appellee alleged and proved cruel and inhuman treatment, and if so, whether or not the appellant is entitled to an adequate alimony.
The testimony shows that both parties to this lawsuit had been previously married, and each had children of their former marriages. There were no children born to complainant and defendant. They lived together for four years.
The appellee testified that (1) his wife was jealous and hated other women; (2) his secretaries received anonymous phone calls which were traced to his home; (3) his wife accused him of philandering with his secretary and of spending his days in the office having fun looking at silk stockings and short skirts; (4) her bickering caused his son to leave home; (5) his wife would not permit his daughter-in-law to visit in their home; and (6) his wife was jealous of a secretary of the bowling league, and in effect caused the league to be dissolved.
The appellee said that all of this caused him to have a 'knot' in his stomach and to have mental agony.
The wife denied all of the above allegations, contending that she did all she could to make her husband happy and that one of the phones in the house was out of order so that the secretary could not hear her when she talked. She testified that they had normal relations up to the day the appellee left home. She offered witnesses to show that she was friendly with her neighbors and that the bowling club was dissolved because of disagreement between the members and not because of the appellant. She offered proof to show that she has high blood pressure and is unable to work regularly, and that she needs support from her husband.
The chancellor, after hearing the appellee's tesitmony, said that the testimony was weak and that if there were children involved, he would sustain the motion to dismiss. In his final opinion the chancellor again said that the testimony was weak, but that since he thought they could not live together, he would grant the divorce and would allow alimony.
The defendant Mrs. Wires contended in the trial court, and now contends in this Court, that the testimony of the complainant/appellee is not sufficient to establish the charge of cruel and inhuman treatment.
The appellant argues that the burden of proof was upon the complainant to have proven by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant, his wife, was guilty of the charge of cruel and inhuman treatment toward the complainant. He cites Burnett v. Burnett, 271 So.2d 90 (Miss.1972) and Criswell v. Criswell, 254 Miss. 746, 182 So.2d 587 (1966).
It is true these cases held that habitual cruel and inhuman treatment should be sustained by 'clear and convincing evidence.' This conclusion was based upon the thesis that mental cruelty without violence required clear and convincing evidence to substantiate the charge. We have reexamined the authorities as to the degree of evidence required, and we are now of the opinion that habitual cruel and inhuman treatment may be established by a preponderance of the creditable evidence.
We agree, however, that the charge of cruel and inhuman treatment against one spouse means something more than unkindness or rudeness or mere incompatibility or want of affection. It has been said that:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Retzer v. Retzer
...been of long duration, the husband is able to pay alimony in some amount, and the wife has no means of livelihood. See, Wires v. Wires, 297 So.2d 900, 903 (Miss.1974) (on habitual cruel and inhuman treatment); Rainey v. Rainey, 205 So.2d 514, 515 (Miss.1967) (on habitual cruel and inhuman t......
-
Brooks v. Brooks
...rudeness, or incompatibility to support the granting of a divorce on the ground of "cruel and inhuman treatment." Wires v. Wires, 297 So.2d 900 (Miss.1974); Burnett v. Burnett, 271 So.2d 90 (Miss.1972). Accordingly, this assignment of error is without merit. It is merely an attempt by Rober......
-
McKee v. Flynt, 91-CA-0987
...or rudeness or mere incompatibility or want of affection." Smith v. Smith, 614 So.2d 394, 396 (Miss.1993), quoting Wires v. Wires, 297 So.2d 900, 902 (Miss.1974). The proof must show that the behavior of the offending spouse was of a "systematic and continuous" nature. Parker v. Parker, 519......
-
Roley v. Roley
...3d 1138, 1142-43 (¶16) (Miss. 2020), reh'g denied (May 7, 2020); Smith v. Smith , 614 So. 2d 394, 396 (Miss. 1993) ; Wires v. Wires , 297 So. 2d 900, 902 (Miss. 1974). This Court has likewise recognized that a preponderance of the evidence standard applies in establishing this fault-based g......