Bennett v. Bennett

LANGDON, P. J.

This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment denying him a divorce from the defendant and granting to said defendant a decree of separate maintenance from the plaintiff and an allowance for her support and the support of her minor child.

Plaintiff filed an action for divorce from the defendant upon the ground of extreme cruelty and also upon the ground of desertion. The specific acts of cruelty alleged included accusations, in public and private, of improper relations with various women and reproaches and threats based thereon. Defendant filed an answer, specifically denying the alleged acts of cruelty and also the desertion, and also filed a cross-complaint wherein she alleged desertion by the plaintiff and also alleged, upon information and belief, that the plaintiff had committed adultery with a young woman named as corespondent in this action, and also alleged that the plaintiff had treated the defendant in a? cruel and inhuman manner—the specific acts of cruelty alleged being plaintiff’s attendance at the theater and other places of amusement with women whose names were unknown to the defendant, and also plaintiff’s conduct in riding in an automobile ivith the woman named as corespondent herein, and against whom the adultery charge is made. Defendant prayed for a decree of separate maintenance. To this cross-complaint, plaintiff filed an answer denying the desertion.

[1]

The court found that the defendant did not “falsely accuse plaintiff of associating with women or falsely accuse him of being guilty of infidelity.” Appellant’s argu

[672]

ment upon this question is that the record contains positive proof that the defendant did accuse the plaintiff of improper relations with women. We have read through the voluminous record with much care and while it is true that ■the testimony clearly shows that the defendant did make such accusations at different times, it appears with equal clearness that the plaintiff’s conduct over a long period of years presented a series of episodes abundantly warranting defendant’s suspicions, protests, and accusations. The trial court did not find, as stated by the appellant, that the accusations alleged were never made by defendant; but found that the accusations were not “falsely” made by the defendant. The appellant’s argument upon this point amounts to a contention that if a man indulges in numerous. improper relations with various women,' it is inconsiderate and indelicate upon the part of his wife to mention the matter to him.