Redding v. Redding

The issue was whether appellant should be adjudged in contempt for the failure to pay five dollars per month alimony previously adjudged against him; and his principal contention was that he was physically unable to work, and, being without property, could not comply with the decree. In this case, as in most of such cases, the chancellor occupied an advantageous position because he had the appellant before him, and could, to an extent, judge of his physical condition by sight.

In a case of this character, if he became unable in fact to comply with an alimony decree, the party should with…