Case ID: or_104/html/0235-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "McBRIDE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Submitted on briefs April 25,
    affirmed May 31, 1922.
    WINFREE v. WINFREE.
    (206 Pac. 1061.)
    Divorce — Decree cannot be Reversed Where Transcript Does not Give All the Evidence.
    Where it appears from the transcript and brief of defendant that oral testimony, in addition to affidavits produced by defendant, was heard by the court in a hearing upon a motion to modify a divorce decree, but the oral testimony is not given in the transcript, the decision of the trial judge will be affirmed.
    From Clackamas: James U. Campbell, Judge.
    In Banc.
    This is an appeal from an order of the Circuit Court denying a motion for a modification of a decree in a divorce case wherein this plaintiff was given the custody of Ruth Winfree, a minor child of plaintiff and the defendant. The defendant to support his motion introduced affidavits tending to show immoral or at least indiscreet conduct of plaintiff with other men prior to the granting of the decree of divorce to her. There was a hearing on the motion in which it appears from the transcript' and brief of the defendant that the court heard oral testimony in addition to the affidavits and at the conclusion of -the hearing denied the application. The oral testimony .does not appear in the transcript; nor is there any certificate that the affidavits were the only testimony considered by the court. Admittedly they were not. From the order overruling the motion the defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    For appellant there was a brief over the names of Mr. G. D. Purcell, Mr. W. W. Dugan, Mr. Walter T. McGuirk and Mr. G. G. Schneider.
    
    
      For respondent there was a brief over the names of Mr. E. L. Noble and Mr. Joseph E. Hedges.
    
   McBRIDE, J.

We cannot reverse this case upon a transcript that does not bring up all of the testimony. It is fair to presume that the able and careful jurist who heard this case found something in the oral testimony that neutralized the effect of the charges made in the affidavits filed.

The, decree is affirmed. Affirmed.