Barringer v. . Barringer

69 S.E. 279, 153 N.C. 392, 1910 N.C. LEXIS 94
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided November 10, 1910·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Pee CubiaM.

The evidence set out in the record discloses most barbarous and inhuman treatment upon the part of the defendant husband. It includes evidence of murderous assaults, continued brutal conduct and long continued habitual drunkenness, fully warranting the findings of the jury.

The issue tendered by defendant, “Is the defendant an habitual drunkard?” is immaterial, as the finding upon the third issue is amply sufficient to uphold the judgment.

"We think, however, his Honor submitted the fourth issue in proper form, except as to the last part, “without provocation on plaintiff’s part,” and that addition did not prejudice defendant. We are not aware that the wife’s provocation ever justifies or excuses the husband in becoming an habitual drunkard.

We have examined the six assignments of error and find them to be without merit. No error.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Barringer v. . Barringer, 69 S.E. 279, 153 N.C. 392, 1910 N.C. LEXIS 94 (N.C. 1910).

69 S.E. 279 (Barringer v. . Barringer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Campbell v. . Laundry
130 S.E. 638 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1925)
Campbell v. Model Steam Laundry
190 N.C. 649 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1925)