Merchant v. Merchant

87 So. 44, 80 Fla. 723
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedNovember 24, 1920
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 87 So. 44 (Merchant v. Merchant) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Merchant v. Merchant, 87 So. 44, 80 Fla. 723 (Fla. 1920).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The appellant brought suit for divorce against the appellee upon the grounds of extreme cruelty by defendant toward complainant and habitual indulgence by defendant in violent and ungovernable temper. The defendant answered the bill, denying the allegations of fact intended to show extreme cruelty by her toward complainant and indulgence by her in violent and ungovernable temper, and made counter averments against her husband of acts of cruelty and adultery. The bill prayed for divorce from the defendant and that the custody of the three minor children, the issue of their marriage, be awarded to complainant.

The defendant prayed for divorce from her husband and that the custody of the children be awarded to her, for an allowance of money sufficient for the maintenance of herself and children, and suit money.

Testimony was taken and the chancellor rendered a decree in favor of the defendant, finding that the complainant had been guilty of adultery as alleged in the answer and cross-bill, decreeing a divorcement of the parties, awarding the custody of the children to the defendant, and awarding- an allowance of money to be paid by the complainant to defendant for maintenance of herself and children, and a further sum for solicitor’s fees.

This court having read and inspected the record and being advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the court that there is no error in the decree save the finding that the defendant was guilty of adultery as alleged in the answer and cross-bill. There is sufficient evidence, however, to support the chancellor’s decree upon the grounds df extreme cruelty.

[725]*725It is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.

Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.

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

Related

United States v. Mack J. Bryant
420 F.2d 1327 (D.C. Circuit, 1969)
Gilchrist v. State
177 So. 2d 777 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1965)
Manning v. State
93 So. 2d 716 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1957)
Rye v. State
15 So. 2d 255 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1943)
Jackson v. State
107 So. 725 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1926)
Clark v. State
101 So. 63 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1924)
Sparkman v. State
92 So. 812 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
87 So. 44, 80 Fla. 723, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/merchant-v-merchant-fla-1920.