Rudd v. Rudd

Supreme Court of Vermont

Rudd v. Rudd

66 Vt. 91

CourtSupreme Court of Vermont

DecidedJanuary 15, 1894

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 66 Vt. 91 (Rudd v. Rudd) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rudd v. Rudd, 66 Vt. 91 (Vt. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

TYLER, J.

This case was defended in the court below upon two grounds. ' i. That the cause had been condoned. 2. That the petitioner had herself violated the marriage contract.

The exceptions present no element of condonation. There was no forgiveness by the petitioner, no promise of future kind treatment by the petitionee and no resumption of marital relations after, the assault of June 15, 1890, was committed. On the contrary, the petitioner avoided the petitionee as much as possible, some of the time hiding from him, though remaining in the house with him until the final separation, which was on June 23, 1890. Langdon v. Langdon, 25 Vt. 678.

The wife’s misconduct is not a bar to her right to a bill of divorce. Dereliction by the petitioner, to constitute a complete bar in recrimination, must itself amount to a statutory cause of divorce. 2 Bish. Mar. and Div., s. 38, and cases cited.

Judgment reversed and bill granted.

Taft, J., dissents.

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

TYLER, J.

This case was defended in the court below upon two grounds. ' i. That the cause had been condoned. 2. That the petitioner had herself violated the marriage contract.

The exceptions present no element of condonation. There was no forgiveness by the petitioner, no promise of future kind treatment by the petitionee and no resumption of marital relations after, the assault of June 15, 1890, was committed. On the contrary, the petitioner avoided the petitionee as much as possible, some of the time hiding from him, though remaining in the house with him until the final separation, which was on June 23, 1890. Langdon v. Langdon, 25 Vt. 678.

The wife’s misconduct is not a bar to her right to a bill of divorce. Dereliction by the petitioner, to constitute a complete bar in recrimination, must itself amount to a statutory cause of divorce. 2 Bish. Mar. and Div., s. 38, and cases cited.

Judgment reversed and bill granted.

Taft, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 Vt. 91, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rudd-v-rudd-vt-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack