From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brett v. Brett

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Jan 15, 1936
182 A. 305 (Md. 1936)

Opinion

[No. 51, October Term, 1935.]

Decided January 15th, 1936.

Divorce a Mensa — Cruelty — Intoxication.

That the husband occasionally drank liquor to excess, and that at those times he indulged in such reprehensible conduct as striking his wife with the palm of his hand or a folded newspaper, and even giving her a passing kick, held not sufficient to entitle her to a divorce a mensa et thoro, especially in view of evidence showing her condonation of his breaches of marital duty.

Legal cruelty on the part of the husband, sufficient to justify a divorce, must be such conduct as will endanger the life, person, or health of the wife, or will cause reasonable apprehension of bodily suffering, rendering cohabitation physically unsafe to a degree justifying a refusal to continue it.

Decided January 15th, 1936.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Allegany County, In Equity (SLOAN, C.J.).

Bill by Susan Brett against Henry Brett, Jr. From a decree for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.

The cause was argued before BOND, C.J., URNER, OFFUTT, PARKE, MITCHELL, SHEHAN, and JOHNSON, JJ.

J. Philip Roman and Walter C. Capper, for the appellant.

William A. Gunter and Taylor Morrison, with whom was William A. Huster on the brief, for the appellee.


Unreported cases.


Summaries of

Brett v. Brett

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Jan 15, 1936
182 A. 305 (Md. 1936)
Case details for

Brett v. Brett

Case Details

Full title:HENRY BRETT, JR. v . SUSAN BRETT

Court:Court of Appeals of Maryland

Date published: Jan 15, 1936

Citations

182 A. 305 (Md. 1936)
182 A. 305

Citing Cases

Foeller v. Foeller

In this state it has been uniformly held that, in order to entitle a party to a divorce of the character here…

Elzey v. Elzey

"It is settled law that a single act of violence will ordinarily not justify a divorce on the ground of…