Tibbs v. Tibbs

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Tibbs v. Tibbs

155 A.2d 73

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 21, 1959

DocketNo. 2426

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 155 A.2d 73 (Tibbs v. Tibbs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tibbs v. Tibbs, 155 A.2d 73 (D.C. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

HOOD, Associate Judge.

Appellant sued for an absolute divorce on the ground of desertion for two years. Her husband did not appear and was represented by court-appointed counsel. Her evidence tended to show that her husband had physically abused her and that she, who had suffered from rheumatic fever since childhood, being fearful for her health, had left him and had lived apart from him for more than two years. The trial court held that appellant had failed to establish grounds for an absolute divorce for desertion, but granted a limited divorce on the ground of cruelty.

Appellant says the trial court was in error in denying her an absolute divorce. Her point is well taken. The trial court found cruelty justifying a limited divorce. Such cruelty justified appellant in separating from her husband, and this constituted constructive desertion on his part. Schreiber v. Schreiber, D.C.Mun.App., 139 A.2d 278.

Reversed with instructions to grant an absolute divorce.

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

HOOD, Associate Judge.

Appellant sued for an absolute divorce on the ground of desertion for two years. Her husband did not appear and was represented by court-appointed counsel. Her evidence tended to show that her husband had physically abused her and that she, who had suffered from rheumatic fever since childhood, being fearful for her health, had left him and had lived apart from him for more than two years. The trial court held that appellant had failed to establish grounds for an absolute divorce for desertion, but granted a limited divorce on the ground of cruelty.

Appellant says the trial court was in error in denying her an absolute divorce. Her point is well taken. The trial court found cruelty justifying a limited divorce. Such cruelty justified appellant in separating from her husband, and this constituted constructive desertion on his part. Schreiber v. Schreiber, D.C.Mun.App., 139 A.2d 278.

Reversed with instructions to grant an absolute divorce.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 A.2d 73, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tibbs-v-tibbs-dc-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack