Legal Opinion

Coleman v. Coleman

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 23, 1930No. 130PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRichards, J.

The trial judge found that no good reason exists why these parties should not live together and that the plaintiff, had, in good faith and without qualification or condition, made repeated offers of reconciliation which were spurned and repulsed by the defendant, ,and it appears from the bill of exceptions that such finding is sustained by sufficient evidence. Under the law and in those circumstances, refusal by the husband to take the wife back, amounts to desertion, even though he was not originally at fault.

Cadwell vs. Cadwell, 2 Ohio App., 278, 282; 19 C. J., 67.

The trial judge, however,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. De Brauwere v. . De BrauwereNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
  2. Decker v. DeckerIllinois Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Vickers v. VickersWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Cadwell v. CadwellOhio Court of Appeals · 1913

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Phillips v. PhillipsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1956
  2. Klump v. KlumpOhio Court of Appeals · 1954
  3. Stuart v. StuartOhio Court of Appeals · 1933
  4. Delfelder v. Norton Bros. Construction Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1936
  5. Segal v. SegalOhio Court of Appeals · 1934

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API