Rogers v. Rogers

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Rogers v. Rogers

139 So. 2d 752, 1962 Fla. App. LEXIS 3527

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 10, 1962

DocketNo. 61-465

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 139 So. 2d 752 (Rogers v. Rogers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rogers v. Rogers, 139 So. 2d 752, 1962 Fla. App. LEXIS 3527 (Fla. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant-wife was defendant in a divorce suit, wherein she counterclaimed for alimony unconnected with divorce under § 65.09, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. The sole question presented on this appeal is whether the testimony concerning grounds for divorce was sufficiently corroborated.

The appellee-husband was awarded a divorce “* * * upon the ground of extreme cruelty.” We recognize the rule oftentimes stated by the Supreme Court, and followed by this court in Lentz v. Lentz, Fla.App.1960, 120 So.2d 815, that the uncorroborated testimony of a plaintiff in a divorce action, without more, is not sufficient to support a valid decree of divorce. Further, this case points out that the sufficiency of the corroboration is determined by the particular circumstances of the individual case.

We think that the facts exposed in this record are sufficiently corroborated. That conduct which will amount to extreme cruelty by one spouse toward the other must depend upon the facts of each case. Baldwin v. Baldwin, 151 Fla. 341, 9 So.2d 717.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant-wife was defendant in a divorce suit, wherein she counterclaimed for alimony unconnected with divorce under § 65.09, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. The sole question presented on this appeal is whether the testimony concerning grounds for divorce was sufficiently corroborated.

The appellee-husband was awarded a divorce “* * * upon the ground of extreme cruelty.” We recognize the rule oftentimes stated by the Supreme Court, and followed by this court in Lentz v. Lentz, Fla.App.1960, 120 So.2d 815, that the uncorroborated testimony of a plaintiff in a divorce action, without more, is not sufficient to support a valid decree of divorce. Further, this case points out that the sufficiency of the corroboration is determined by the particular circumstances of the individual case.

We think that the facts exposed in this record are sufficiently corroborated. That conduct which will amount to extreme cruelty by one spouse toward the other must depend upon the facts of each case. Baldwin v. Baldwin, 151 Fla. 341, 9 So.2d 717.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 So. 2d 752, 1962 Fla. App. LEXIS 3527, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-rogers-fladistctapp-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack