Freeman v. Freeman
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.- — Hon. John A. Talty, Judge. (1) The proof should be confined to matters existing before the bringing of the suit. Defendant could not desert plaintiff after the suit was brought. The statute requires the desertion should exist, without a reasonable cause for one whole year before the institution of the suit. In divorce proceedings the recovery must be on the state of facts which existed when the suit was brought.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.- — Hon. John A. Talty, Judge. (1) The proof should be confined to matters existing before the bringing of the suit. Defendant could not desert plaintiff after the suit was brought. The statute requires the desertion should exist, without a reasonable cause for one whole year before the institution of the suit. In divorce proceedings the recovery must be on the state of facts which existed when the suit was brought. Dwyer v. Dwyer, 26 Mo. App. 651. (2) To prove desertion, in the statutory sense as affording a ground of divorce it is essential to show…
1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.
The suit is for divorce. The ground alleged in the petition is desertion. There was no answer denying the desertion, and a cross-bill alleging non-support.
The evidence tends to show that the wife was the daughter of well-to-do parents residing in Jefferson City, Missouri; that the husband was a printer with no means and with 'an earning capacity of from ten to eighteen dollars per week. They were married in January, 189Y, at the home of the wife’s parents where they continued to reside several months after the marriage. They then came to the city of St. Louis and lived with plaintiff’s…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Krauthoff v. KrauthoffMissouri Court of Appeals · 1915
- Gallemore v. GallemoreMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905
- Donley v. DonleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- Weller v. WellerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910