Legal Opinion

Danielson v. Danielson

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 30, 1929No. Docket No. 6229PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

HOLLZER, J., pro tem.

This is an action for divorce. The trial court granted the husband, who is the defendant herein, a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion. Plaintiff appeals, claiming that the evidence is insufficient to sustain such decree.

The gist of plaintiff’s contention is that the finding of desertion rests wholly upon her alleged refusal to reside in the home selected by the defendant. As to such finding, it is insisted that there is no evidence showing that the defendant had actually selected some particular place as the home, or that he had offered a definite home to her…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hudson v. HudsonSupreme Court of Florida · 1910
  2. Vosburg v. VosburgCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Bibb v. BibbCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Polk v. PolkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API