Norton v. Norton

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Norton v. Norton

200 N.E. 918, 294 Mass. 211, 1936 Mass. LEXIS 1182

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedApril 1, 1936

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 200 N.E. 918 (Norton v. Norton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Norton v. Norton, 200 N.E. 918, 294 Mass. 211, 1936 Mass. LEXIS 1182 (Mass. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

This is an appeal by the libellee from a decree granting a divorce on the ground of cruel and abusive treatment, awarding custody of their minor children to the libellant and ordering payments to be made to her for the support of the children by the libellee. The trial judge made a report of the material facts found by him. The evidence is not reported. Therefore it must be presumed that the findings of fact were supported by evidence. The only question open on such an appeal is whether the decree is within the scope of the libel and is supported by the facts found. These facts need not be repeated or summarized. They did not establish or require a finding of condonation. Giles v. Giles, 279 Mass. 469. Plainly they supported the decree. Jordan v. Ulmer, Mass. 577. Wyness v. Crowley, 292 Mass. 459.

Decree affirmed.

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

By the Court.

This is an appeal by the libellee from a decree granting a divorce on the ground of cruel and abusive treatment, awarding custody of their minor children to the libellant and ordering payments to be made to her for the support of the children by the libellee. The trial judge made a report of the material facts found by him. The evidence is not reported. Therefore it must be presumed that the findings of fact were supported by evidence. The only question open on such an appeal is whether the decree is within the scope of the libel and is supported by the facts found. These facts need not be repeated or summarized. They did not establish or require a finding of condonation. Giles v. Giles, 279 Mass. 469. Plainly they supported the decree. Jordan v. Ulmer, Mass. 577. Wyness v. Crowley, 292 Mass. 459.

Decree affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 N.E. 918, 294 Mass. 211, 1936 Mass. LEXIS 1182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/norton-v-norton-mass-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack