Morfessis v. Morfessis

184 F.2d 468, 87 U.S. App. D.C. 292, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 3113
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedAugust 28, 1950
Docket10249
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 184 F.2d 468 (Morfessis v. Morfessis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Morfessis v. Morfessis, 184 F.2d 468, 87 U.S. App. D.C. 292, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 3113 (D.C. Cir. 1950).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Mrs. Morfessis appeals from the dismissal of her suit for limited divorce. Since the lower court found that she had failed to establish a prima facie case of cruelty, it dismissed her complaint 1 2without considering the merits of appellee’s defense of desertion.

The findings of the District Court, sitting without a jury, “shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the trial court to judge of the credibility of the witnesses.” 2 As the trier of the facts, it is in the best position to consider the demean- or of the witnesses and to weigh their testimony. 3 In view of the contradictory nature of appellant’s testimony as to material facts, we do not think the trial court’s finding that appellant had not made out a prima facie case was “clearly erroneous.”

Affirmed.

1

. Rule 41 (b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A.

3

. Frazier v. Frazier, 1932, 61 App.D.C. 279, 280, 61 F.2d 920, 921; Blundon v. Blundon, 1926, 56 App.D.C. 313, 12 F. 2d 848; Allen v. Allen, 1923, 52 App. D.C. 228, 231, 285 F. 962, 965; Cole v. Cole, 1923, 52 App.D.C. 302, 303, 286 F. 764, 765.

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

Related

Pleasant D. Farrar v. United States
275 F.2d 868 (D.C. Circuit, 1960)
Cocci v. Cocci
185 F.2d 898 (D.C. Circuit, 1950)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
184 F.2d 468, 87 U.S. App. D.C. 292, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 3113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morfessis-v-morfessis-cadc-1950.