Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Dickason v. Dickason

Supreme Court of Arizona

June 20, 1932

PAUL DICKASON, Appellant,
v.
OCTIA S. DICKASON, Appellee

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the County of Maricopa. Howard C. Speakman, Judge. Judgment affirmed.

Mr. T. E. Scarborough, for Appellant.

Mr. George F. MacDonald, for Appellee.

OPINION

Page 281

[40 Ariz. 378] LOCKWOOD, J.

Octia S. Dickason, hereinafter called plaintiff, brought suit for divorce against her husband, Paul Dickason, hereinafter called defendant. The case was tried to the court without a jury, and a judgment was rendered granting the divorce, giving plaintiff the custody of the three minor children of the marriage, and providing that defendant should pay to her for the support of such children the sum of $30 per month. Defendant seeks a review of this judgment.

There are some three assignments of error, the first two being, in substance, that the evidence does not sustain the judgment, while the third is that there is a variance between the allegations and the proof.

The complaint alleges the following grounds for divorce:

"That the defendant has been guilty of excesses and cruel treatment toward this plaintiff in that, on various occasions the defendant has accused this plaintiff of being immoral and having illicit relations with other men. Defendant did hit and strike the [40 Ariz. 379] plaintiff and on other occasions the defendant has denied his parentage to the younger son, Van Huston Dickason, both of which accusations are false and untrue and made with the intent to injure and humiliate the plaintiff herein; that all of said conduct, excesses and cruel treatment have seriously affected plaintiff's health, both in body and in mind, and have caused her great mental anguish, rendering it impossible for plaintiff to continue her relations with defendant as his wife."

It will be seen by this that the charge is of both mental and physical cruelty, the mental cruelty consisting of (a) general accusations by defendant that the plaintiff was immoral and had illicit relations with other men, and (b) the specific accusation that the younger child of plaintiff was not also the child of defendant. The allegation of physical cruelty is that defendant struck plaintiff.

The evidence in regard to the allegation of illicit relations with other men is found only in the testimony of plaintiff herself as follows:

"Well, he accused me of having relations with other men, that I had been stepping out on him for eighteen months, and I couldn't possibly been doing that because for nine months before. . . ."

There is, however, no corroboration upon this point.

The second alleged act of mental cruelty is found in the testimony of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.