From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Blunk v. Blunk

Appellate Court of Illinois
Jan 7, 1946
327 Ill. App. 666 (Ill. App. Ct. 1946)

Opinion

Term No. 4,508. (Abstract of Decisions.)

Opinion filed January 7, 1946 Released for publication February 7, 1946

DIVORCE, § 18when evidence did not show defendant to be habitual drunkard as term is understood in law. On appeal from decree awarding defendant's husband divorce on grounds of habitual drunkenness, where it appeared that evidence was conflicting in that some witnesses testified they had seen defendant intoxicated, whereas, other witnesses testified they had never seen defendant drunk and were of opinion she was not habitual drunkard, held that upon evidence defendant was not guilty of habitual drunkenness as that term is understood in law and decree should be reversed.

See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Madison county; the Hon. D.H. MUDGE, Judge, presiding.

Reversed and remanded with directions. Heard in this court at the October term, 1945.

Jacoby, Patton, Manns Coppinger and O'Neill Davey, for appellant;

Green Hoagland, for appellee;

Kenneth F. Kelly, of counsel.


Not to be published in full. Opinion filed January 7, 1946; released for publication February 7, 1946.


Summaries of

Blunk v. Blunk

Appellate Court of Illinois
Jan 7, 1946
327 Ill. App. 666 (Ill. App. Ct. 1946)
Case details for

Blunk v. Blunk

Case Details

Full title:James A. Blunk, Appellee, v. Rose M. Blunk, Appellant

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois

Date published: Jan 7, 1946

Citations

327 Ill. App. 666 (Ill. App. Ct. 1946)
64 N.E.2d 787

Citing Cases

Todd v. Todd

The habitual but moderate use of intoxicating liquors does not meet the test. McGill v. McGill, 19 Fla. 341;…

McMurtry v. State Board of Medical Examiners

[11] The substance of many definitional decisions on the subject is that an act which is done habitually is…