Leavell v. Leavell
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Cass Circuit Court. — No». Wm, L. Jarrott, Judge. (1) The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendants co-operated together and acted in concert and that such acts and conduct ivere the cause of the separation of the plaintiff and her husband; and that defendants acted in bad faith, that their conduct and actions were for the deliberate, willful and wanton purpose of separating plaintiff and her husband.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cass Circuit Court. — No». Wm, L. Jarrott, Judge. (1) The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendants co-operated together and acted in concert and that such acts and conduct ivere the cause of the separation of the plaintiff and her husband; and that defendants acted in bad faith, that their conduct and actions were for the deliberate, willful and wanton purpose of separating plaintiff and her husband. Modisett v. McPike, 74 Mo. 647; Strode v. Abbott, 102 Mo. App. 169; Nichols v. Nichols, 147 Mo. 387; Tucker v. Tucker, 32 L.…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
The plaintiff’s petition in this action is for damages resulting to her by reason of defendants alienating the affections of her husband and causing him to abandon her. It charges that defendants (who are husband and wife) “wrongfully, wickedly, wantonly and maliciously acted, conspired and co-operated together, with the wrongful, wicked, wanton and malicious intent to canse and induce” plaintiff’s husband to abandon her. And that in pursuance of said intent, they did, “wrongfully, wickedly, wantonly and maliciously entice, persuade, influence and induce plaintiff’s husband to leave and…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Washington Gas Light Co. v. LansdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Buckley v. KnappSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Kniffen v. . McConnellNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
- Nichols v. NicholsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Chellis v. . ChapmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Woodhouse v. Woodhouse Et Ux.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1925
- Mitchell v. KardeschSupreme Court of Missouri · 2010
- State of Missouri v. Demetrick TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 2015
- Dunaway v. TrouttSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1960
- Dawes v. StarrettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1935
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.