Mandigo v. Mandigo
This text of 15 Vt. 786 (Mandigo v. Mandigo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The proof in the case, in the opinion of the court, presented an ordinary case of wilful desertion. In denying the bill, the court so remarked, and further intimated, in the present, as it did in some other cases arising under the same stat-[787]*787ate, in the course of this circuit, that, in order to grant a bill for the cause here alleged, something more must be shown than a wilful desertion of the wife by the husband, although he were of ample ability to maintain her, and refused her any aid in that respect. The terms, “ grossly, wantonly, and cruelly,” &c., although not very definite, must not be considered wholly insignificant. The legislature did intend a new cause of divorce, and the court could not regard it as synonymous with that of wilful desertion, where three years are required, and here only one year.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
15 Vt. 786, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mandigo-v-mandigo-vt-1843.