Sabot v. Sabot

166 P. 624, 97 Wash. 395, 1917 Wash. LEXIS 1060
Washington Supreme Court·Decided July 25, 1917·No. No. 13976·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Chadwick, J.

The only question in this case is whether the findings of fact are sufficient to sustain the decree.

The court found:

“That for a period of two years last past the defendant has assumed and maintained towards plaintiff an indifferent attitude, and has made no attempt to conceal that she has neither affection nor regard for the plaintiff, and has by numerous annoying acts and words, made the home life of plaintiff burdensome in the extreme, so that it has become impossible for the plaintiff to longer cohabit and live with said defendant, all of which acts were without just cause or provocation.”
“Cruel treatment of either party by the other, or personal indignities rendering life burdensome” are made grounds for •divorce by the statute. Rem. Code, § 982.

Indifference is an indignity and unconcealed aversion is a cruelty within the meaning and intent of the statute. They are more refined but no less substantial than words or blows •or neglect.

Affirmed.

Ellis, C. J., Mount, Main, and Mourns, JJ., concur.

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

Sabot v. Sabot, 166 P. 624, 97 Wash. 395, 1917 Wash. LEXIS 1060 (Wash. 1917).

166 P. 624 (Sabot v. Sabot) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Frizzell v. Frizzell
333 P.2d 657 (Washington Supreme Court, 1959)
Best v. Best
292 P.2d 1061 (Washington Supreme Court, 1956)
Flanagan v. Flanagan
213 P.2d 801 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1950)
Neff v. Neff
192 P.2d 344 (Washington Supreme Court, 1948)
Jensen v. Jensen
147 P.2d 512 (Washington Supreme Court, 1944)