Morrison v. Morrison

California Supreme Court

Morrison v. Morrison

20 Cal. 431, 1862 Cal. LEXIS 58

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1862

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 20 Cal. 431 (Morrison v. Morrison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Morrison v. Morrison, 20 Cal. 431, 1862 Cal. LEXIS 58 (Cal. 1862).

Pincite

Opinion

Cope, J. delivered the opinion of the Court—Field, C. J. concurring.

We think the proofs in this case entitle the plaintiff to a divorce. The evidence shows that the parties were married in 1853, and separated soon after the marriage. The circumstances of the separation are not shown, but sufficient appears to make out a case of desertion. The parties lived together about three weeks, when the defendant left the country, abandoning the plaintiff, and failing to make provision for her support. He is still absent, and has never in any manner contributed to her maintenance, to obtain which she [432]*432has been compelled to rely upon her own exertions. Desertion consists in the cessation of matrimonial cohabitation, and the intent to desert; and we think both ingredients are to be found in this case. The former is proved by positive testimony, and the latter appears inferentially from the fact of the abandonment without apparent cause. The plaintiff is not required to show negatively that no cause existed, for none appearing, the law will not presume one. The presumption is that there was none, and that the defendant intended the consequences resulting from his acts.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for a judgment as prayed for in the complaint.

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

Cope, J. delivered the opinion of the Court—Field, C. J. concurring.

We think the proofs in this case entitle the plaintiff to a divorce. The evidence shows that the parties were married in 1853, and separated soon after the marriage. The circumstances of the separation are not shown, but sufficient appears to make out a case of desertion. The parties lived together about three weeks, when the defendant left the country, abandoning the plaintiff, and failing to make provision for her support. He is still absent, and has never in any manner contributed to her maintenance, to obtain which she [432]*432has been compelled to rely upon her own exertions. Desertion consists in the cessation of matrimonial cohabitation, and the intent to desert; and we think both ingredients are to be found in this case. The former is proved by positive testimony, and the latter appears inferentially from the fact of the abandonment without apparent cause. The plaintiff is not required to show negatively that no cause existed, for none appearing, the law will not presume one. The presumption is that there was none, and that the defendant intended the consequences resulting from his acts.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for a judgment as prayed for in the complaint.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 Cal. 431, 1862 Cal. LEXIS 58, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morrison-v-morrison-cal-1862.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack