Case Name: Zeida Newton, Appellant, v. George E. Newton, Respondent
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Washington
Decision Date: 1922-10-30
Citations: 122 Wash. 105
Docket Number: No. 17343
Parties: Zeida Newton, Appellant, v. George E. Newton, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Washington Reports
Volume: 122
Pages: 105–106

Head Matter:
[No. 17343.
Department One.
October 30, 1922.]
Zeida Newton, Appellant, v. George E. Newton, Respondent.
Divorce (37)&emdash;Grounds&emdash;Nonsupport and Desertion&emdash;EvidenceSufficiency. A divorce on the ground of desertion and nonsupport is properly denied where it appears that the defendant was a sick man unable to earn support, and in order not to be a burden, resided for a time with his brother, living apart without abandoning plaintiff.
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Thurston county, Wright, J., entered February 8, 1922, upon findings in favor of the defendant, in an action for divorce, tried to the court.
Affirmed.
P. C. Kibbe, for appellant.
Troy & Sturdevant, for respondent.
Reported in 209 Pac. 1075.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
-In this divorce action the grounds alleged were non-support, desertion and cruel treatment, the allegations as to the last ground not being supported by a scintilla of evidence.
The trial court found, after hearing the parties and their witnesses, that, "during all the time alleged in plaintiff's complaint, defendant was a sick man, and by reason of his illness was unable to earn means sufficient to support plaintiff and defendant's children, and by reason thereof and in order not to be a burden upon plaintiff, defendant resided for a time with his brother in Portland, Oregon, and although living apart from plaintiff, defendant did not abandon plaintiff or his children."
The relief prayed by plaintiff was therefore denied.
The entire record has been read and shows that the evidence overwhelmingly preponderates in support of the court's findings and judgment.
Affirmed.