Case ID: okla_95/html/0284-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "KENNAMER, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

LARGE v. LARGE.
    No. 12541
    Opinion Filed Oct. 16, 1923.
    
      (Syllabus.)
    
    
      1. Divorce — Appeal — Sufficiency of Evidence.
    In an appeal from a judgment of the trial court granting a' decree of divorce, where the only question presented challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment, this court will examine the evidence, and if the same is found sufficient to sustain the judgment of the trial court, the judgment will be affirmed.
    
      2. Same — Affirmance.
    Record examined, and held, that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the judgment of the trial court and the judgment is, therefore, affirmed.
    Error from District Court, Pawnee County; Eedmond S. Cole, Judge.
    Action by Grace M. Large against A. C. Large. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
    Affirmed.
    T. S. Hurst, for plaintiff in error.
    McCollum & McCollum, for defendant in error.
   KENNAMER, J.

Grace M. Large, plaintiff, instituted this action in the district court of Pawnee county against A. C. Large, defendant, to obtain a decree of divorce upon the ground of extreme cruelty. The trial court, upon the evidence introduced in the trial of the cause, granted the plaintiff a decree of divorce. Defendant, A. C. Large, prosecutes this appeal to reverse the judgment of the trial court.

The only question raised in the appeal presents the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment of the trial court. We have carefully examined the evidence, and it is our conclusion that the judgment entered is supported by sufficient evidence. It therefore necessarily follows that the judgment must be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

All the Justices concur.