Compton v. Compton

9 La. Ann. 499
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedSeptember 15, 1854
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 9 La. Ann. 499 (Compton v. Compton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Compton v. Compton, 9 La. Ann. 499 (La. 1854).

Opinion

Buchanan, J.

This appeal turns upon two bills of exceptions to the rejection of evidence, which substantially involve the same point.

On the trial, the defendant offered witnesses to prove, that the plaintiff, since the institution of this suit, committed an act of adultery with John A. Stiphens, and also, that plaintiff, at the time of this trial (6th May, 1854), is in a state of pregnancy.

The plaintiff sues the defendant for separation of bed and board, on the ground of illtreatment, by beating her, and turning her and her children out of doors, and neglecting to provide for their subsistence; also on that of gross and habitual intemperance.

Defendant pleads “ that plaintiff has been unfaithful to the marriage bed; that she has committed acts of adultery since her marriage with defendant, and even since she instituted this suit.*’ He demands a divorce.

We agree with the Judge below, that these allegations of adultery are entirely too vague to allow the introduction of evidence of any specific act of adultery. No particulars of time, place or person were given, which could have put the plaintiff on her guard, and rendered it possible for her to procure rebutting evidence. In a case of separation of bed and board, Chief Justice Eustis used the following language: “Vague and general alligations cannot support a petition in an ordinary civil suit. The cause of action, the object of [500]*500the demand, and the nature of the title, must be stated with such certainty as to apprise the defendant of every circumstance necessary to put him on his just defence, and to bar a subsequent investigation of matters once decided. Sound policy requires that there should be no relaxation of these rules in proceedings of this kind, which involve the fate of individuals, and the most important interests of society.” 8 Ann. p. 16 and cases there cited.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Related

Coston v. Coston
200 So. 474 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1941)
Higgins v. Dobard
116 So. 385 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1928)
Hodges v. Lyon
98 So. 49 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1923)
Succession of Gallia
58 So. 691 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1911)
State v. Hackley, Hume & Joyce
50 So. 772 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1909)
Succession of Gabisso
44 So. 438 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 La. Ann. 499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/compton-v-compton-la-1854.