Crutcher v. Crutcher
Mississippi Supreme Court
Eeoai the chancery court of Quitman county. How. Peboy Bell, Chancellor. Mrs. Crutcher, the appellant, was complainant, and her husband, George T. Crutcher, the appellee, was defendant in the court below. Erom a decree sustaining a demurrer to the bill of complaint and dismissing the suit, the complainant appealed to the supreme court. The suit was for a divorce.
Read the full summary
Eeoai the chancery court of Quitman county. How. Peboy Bell, Chancellor. Mrs. Crutcher, the appellant, was complainant, and her husband, George T. Crutcher, the appellee, was defendant in the court below. Erom a decree sustaining a demurrer to the bill of complaint and dismissing the suit, the complainant appealed to the supreme court. The suit was for a divorce. The bill charged “habitual, cruel,- and inhuman treatment,” averring that the defendant was guilty of what is known as “pederasty” (improper intimacy by a man with the male sex), and that defendant is addicted to such bestial habits…
1Opinion of the Court
Whitfield, O. J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
The demurrer should have been overruled. We hold the crime of pederasty to be cruel and inhuman treatment, within the meaning of our statutes on the subject. We approve the reasoning of the Ohio case cited by counsel for the appellant. That court says (quoting from Mr. Bishop in the fourth edition of his work on Marriage and Divorce) : “ ‘Cruelty, in the sense of the statutes on this subject, is such conduct in one of the married parties as renders his continuance of cohabitation either so dangerous to the other party in fact, or attended…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Cherry v. CherryMississippi Supreme Court · 1991
- Russell v. RussellMississippi Supreme Court · 1930
- Howard v. HowardMississippi Supreme Court · 1962
- Scott v. ScottMississippi Supreme Court · 1954
- Price v. PriceMississippi Supreme Court · 1938
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.