Snyder v. Snyder

164 P. 209, 95 Wash. 619, 1917 Wash. LEXIS 849
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedApril 13, 1917
DocketNo. 13774
StatusPublished

This text of 164 P. 209 (Snyder v. Snyder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Washington Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Snyder v. Snyder, 164 P. 209, 95 Wash. 619, 1917 Wash. LEXIS 849 (Wash. 1917).

Opinion

Chadwick, J. —

^Action for divorce on the grounds of nonsupport and neglect. The parties were married at North Yakima in August, 1914. Respondent worked at “odd jobs” for three weeks .in North Yakima, and then borrowed money with which to take himself and wife to the home of his parents in Seattle. One child was born as the fruit of their union.

The record shows that, during the time intervening between November, 1914, and May, 1915, respondent had but two months of steady employment, and that during that time he contributed nothing to the support of his wife. In May, [620]*6201915, he went to Portland, Oregon, promising to send her money. From Portland he went to San Francisco, and thence to Fort Rosecrans, where he joined the United States Army for a period of enlistment expiring in 1918. He was transferred from Fort Rosecrans to Fort Worden, Washington, in March, 1916. During his absence, the extent of his contributions to the maintenance of his wife and baby seems to have consisted of two money orders of fifty cents each. Appellant, since her marriage, has had to rely on the charity and kindness of relatives for that support which her husband has denied her.

It is unnecessary to further detail “the short and simple annals” of this unhappy pair. We find the charge of nonsupport to be unquestionably sustained.

“Divorces may be granted by the superior court on application of the party injured, for the following causes:

“(6) ... or the neglect or refusal of the husband to make suitable provisions for his family.” Rem. Code, § 982.

Reversed and remanded with directions to grant the prayer of appellant’s complaint.

Ellis, C. J., Main, and Webster, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
164 P. 209, 95 Wash. 619, 1917 Wash. LEXIS 849, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/snyder-v-snyder-wash-1917.