From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barker v. Barker

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Oct 1, 1950
61 S.E.2d 360 (N.C. 1950)

Opinion

Filed 11 October, 1950.

Divorce and Alimony 5d — In an action for alimony without divorce, G.S. 50-16, on the ground of mistreatment constituting constructive abandonment, the absence of an allegation that defendant's misconduct was without adequate provocation, is fatal, and judgment in plaintiff's favor will be set aside on appeal, and the cause remanded for dismissal unless plaintiff moves in apt time to amend. G.S. 1-131.

APPEAL by defendant from Crisp, Special Judge, June Term, 1950, of WILKES.

Whicker Whicker and Trivette, Holshouser Mitchell for plaintiff, appellee.

Bowie Bowie and W. H. McElwee for defendant, appellant.


This was a suit for alimony without divorce under G.S. 50-16. The plaintiff alleged as the basis of her suit that the defendant had neglected and mistreated her, and had abused and assaulted her, had threatened her life and driven her from home, and "by his conduct had made her burdens unbearable and life intolerable." In this Court the defendant demurred ore tenus on the ground that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action for that nowhere, in the complaint did the plaintiff allege that the indignities offered to her person or his conduct in causing her to leave home were without adequate provocation on her part.

An examination of the complaint shows that this material averment was not incorporated in the complaint. It has been repeatedly held by this Court that this averment, in connection with allegations such as are contained in the plaintiff's complaint as ground for relief, is essential and its omission fatal to the plaintiff's cause of action. Best v. Best, 228 N.C. 9, 44 S.E.2d 214; Lawrence v. Lawrence, 226 N.C. 624, 39 S.E.2d 807; Pearce v. Pearce, 225 N.C. 571, 35 S.E.2d 636; Howell v. Howell, 223 N.C. 62, 25 S.E.2d 169; Pollard v. Pollard, 221 N.C. 46, 19 S.E.2d 1; Carnes v. Carnes, 204 N.C. 636, 169 S.E. 222; Garsed v. Garsed, 170 N.C. 672, 87 S.E. 45.

In accord with the established rule and on authority of the cases cited the demurrer to the complaint is sustained. The judgment below predicated upon the complaint must be held for error (Tucker v. Baker, 86 N.C. 1). The action is remanded to the Superior Court of Wilkes County with instruction that same be dismissed unless within apt time the plaintiff moves for leave to amend under G.S. 1-131. White v. Charlotte, 207 N.C. 721, 178 S.E. 219; Watson v. Lee County, 224 N.C. 508 (513), 31 S.E.2d 535.

Reversed.


Summaries of

Barker v. Barker

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Oct 1, 1950
61 S.E.2d 360 (N.C. 1950)
Case details for

Barker v. Barker

Case Details

Full title:EDNA MAE BARKER v. JAMES G. BARKER

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Oct 1, 1950

Citations

61 S.E.2d 360 (N.C. 1950)
61 S.E.2d 360

Citing Cases

Tucker v. Baker

PER CURIAM. Dismissed. Cited: Clements v. Rogers, 91 N.C. 64; Hunter v. Yarborough, 92 N.C. 70; Burbank v.…

Campbell v. Campbell

The judge's failure to so instruct the jury constituted prejudicial error and requires a new trial. Howell v.…