Evening star., 1935-04-15
Neither Adequate Nor Ap-
propriate to Community,
Says Justice.
UPHOLDS VALIDITY
IN MRS. H0LT'S CASE
Wife Had Been Granted Limited
Decree After Reno Divorce
Granted Husband.

Reiterating refusal Of the local
courts to recognize Reno divorces
granted to transients, Justice William
Hitz of the District Court Of Appeals
today scathingly denounced the
stringency of the Districts laws, which
induce litigants to seek relief in other
jurisdictions.
1T Is probably true that a law Of
divorce like our own, which is based
on adultery only, is now neither ade-
uuate nor appropriate to the life OF
the community and tends to produce
train Of perjury, bigamy and
bastardy," he stated in an opinion up
holding the Validity of limited de-
cree granted by the District Supreme
Court to Mrs. Margaret Emma Holt,
former student at Maryland college.
He held that since control Of the
matrimonial status lies in the law OF
| the domicile of the parties to the marr
| riage, the DEGREES so casually granted
| by a few Of our States to sojourners,
tourists and birds of passage have no
extraterritorial validity or effect in the
District of Columbia under the Con-
stitution."
legislature May Act.
This constitutional rule may not
| be relaxed by the courts, no matter
what the nature of the local divorce
laws. he asserted, but added, in refer
ence to the Districts statutes. that
the evil may be recognized and cor
rected by the Legislature whenever 1t
sees At to do So"
The case was brought before the
court on an appeal by Laurence James
Holt from a decree Of limited divorce
with alimony entered by the District
Supreme Court.
The young couple were students at
a college in Maryland when they were
married February, 1881. They came
to Washington to live with the par
ents of the husband, who were people
of some means. At the time Of the
marriage the husband was % years old
and the wife 20.
After a little more than three
months together, which the court
states were consumed largely in quar-
rels which each party blameS upon
the other" the wife, on June 5. re.
turned to her relatives in Baltimore.
Six days later the husband left his
fathers home in an automobile, say
ing he was going to New York or
Maine in search of employment. Be-
fore reaching Baltimore he changed
his course for California, where he had
relatives, and before reaching Cali
fornia he changed for Reno.
Extreme Cruelty Filed.
A day after expiration of his required
six weeks residence he filed suit for
absolute divorce, charging extreme
cruelty. The wife drove to Reno with
her married sister and filed an an
swer to the divorce suit. Justice Hitz
states in mis- opinion the wife's later
contention that she became recon-
ciled with her husband in the Nevada
City. This the husband afterward
denied. but the court held its was re-
ouired by subsequent evidence to be-
lieve the reconciliation had taken
place.
Despite this, Mrs. Holt left Reno
four days before the brief divorce
hearing, which terminated with the
entering OF an absolute decree.
More than a year later the wife
brought suit for limited divorce and
alimony here. In this action she
claimed the Reno divorce as fraudu-
lent and alleged desertion and cruelty.
The trial court ruled that the hus-
band had no legal domicile in Reno
and that he deserted her when he
went there.
The fraudulent nature of the Reno
decree was affirmed by the appellate
court, which held, however, that by
the reconciliation in Reno the wife
condoned previous offenSes. Despite
this, the subsequent conduct Of the
husband, who left Washington for
Connecticut, was sufficient cause to
revive the earlier charges Of cruelty
and desertion, Justice Hitz stated.