Case ID: ny-st-rep_34/html/0493-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Osborne, X", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mary O’Keefe, App’lt, v. William H. O’Keefe, Resp’t.
    
      (City Court of Brooklyn,
    
    
      General Term,
    
    
      Filed November 24, 1890.)
    
    Divorce—-Separation.
    Where the evidence in an action for separation on the ground of cruel treatment is conflicting, the decision of the trial court will not he disturbed.
    Appeal from judgment in favor of defendant.
    Plaintiff’s complaint charged defendant with verbal abuse, with ■striking her, with failure to provide necessary food for the family and forbidding her credit at the grocer’s and butcher’s. The evidence was sharply conflicting, and the trial court found in favor of defendant.
    
      Thomas F. Magner, for app’lt; Jerry A. Wernberg, for resp’t
   Osborne, X

Action for separation on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment.

The learned trial judge has found in favor of the defendant, and the only question before us on this appeal is as to whether the findings are supported by the evidence. We have carefully examined all the evidence, and are of -the opinion that the judgment should be affirmed. It is true that there is a decided conflict in many instances between the plaintiff and her witnesses and the defendant and his witnesses, but there is no such preponderance of evidence in favor of the plaintiff as would justify us in interfering with the conclusions of the trial court. The learned trial judge had the witnesses before him, heard them testify and had full opportunity to observe their manner and bearing while on the witness stand, and was thus able to weigh their testimony and to ascertain the degree of credibility to be attached to the statements of the various witnesses better than we can from the-printed case on appeal. A perusal of the testimony satisfies us that, while the condnbt of the defendant was in some cases highly censurable', yet plaintiff has fallen far short of establishing such a case'in her favor as would entitle"her to the relief that she seeks.

Judgment affirmed. No costs..

Van Wyck, J., concurs.