Case ID: okla_55/html/0067-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MATHEWS, C.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CLARK v. CLARK.
    No. 6070.
    Opinion Filed January 25, 1916.
    (154 Pac. 1142.)
    1. DIVORCE — Grounds—“Extreme Cruelty.” Where-one .spouse frequently cursed and abused the other, such conduct constituted “extreme cruelty’’ and warranted the granting of a divorce.
    2. SAME. Whipping one's wife constitutes one of the highest degrees of "extreme cruelty."
    (Syllabus by Mathews. (M
    
      Error .from Superior Court, Custer County; J. W. Lawter, Judge.
    
    Action by Fern A. Clark against- Monroe F. Clark. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
    Affirmed.
    
      G. W. Cornell, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Darnell & Darnell, for defendant in error.
   Opinion by

MATHEWS, C.

The parties will be designated as in the trial court. This was an action' for divorce upon the alleged grounds of extreme cruelty and gross neglect of duty. The trial court .found for the plaintiff, granting a decree of divorce as prayed for, and defendant prosecutes this appeal, assigning as the only error the insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict.

It could serve no useful purpose to review the evidence here, but we believe the same fully sustains the finding of the trial court. Plaintiff testified that defend-, ant frequently cursed her, and struck her upon three different occasions, and that he neglected her while she was sick. While it is no 'uncommon occurrence to find women who do endure such outrageous treatment rather than desert their husbands, yet we will not judicially say that it is their duty to do so. If cursing and whipping one’s wife do not constitute “extreme cruelty,” it is difficult to imagine a condition that would comply with the term.

We recommend that the judgment be affirmed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.