Case Name: LEWIS A. SHINN v. ETHEL WILLEFORD SHINN
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1960-11-23
Citations: 253 N.C. 426
Docket Number: 
Parties: LEWIS A. SHINN v. ETHEL WILLEFORD SHINN.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 253
Pages: 426–427

Head Matter:
LEWIS A. SHINN v. ETHEL WILLEFORD SHINN.
(Filed 23 November, 1960.)
Appeal by plaintiff from Preyer, J., August 1960 Term, CabaRRUs Superior Court.
Civil action instituted by the plaintiff on July 12, 1960, for absolute divorce on the grounds of more than two years separation. The complaint alleged the residence of the parties, their marriagé on November 22, 1923, the birth of three children, all of whom are now of age, the separation of the parties in 1944 or 1945.
After the service of process on the defendant,. Ethel Willeford Shinn, her physician, Dr. F. Lee Nance, made an affidavit that the defendant was, and has been since 1958, suffering from multiple sclerosis andi diabetes mellitus from which she is “progressively going downhill ... In my opinion Mrs. Shinn is neither physically nor mentally capable of defending an action against her in any court. It is doubtful whether she could physically attend court.” Upon this affidavit the clerk superior court made an order appointing Katherine Shinn Barringer as guardian ad litem to defend the action.
The guardian ad litem filed answer in which she alleged: (1) The plaintiff abandoned the defendant in 1945 and since that time has failed and refused to provide the defendant with any support whatever. (2) The plaintiff is able-bodied and regularly employed' and amply able to support the defendant. The guardian ad litem, in behalf of her ward, asked the court to allow temporary alimony and counsel fees and, after hearing, to make a permanent award.
The plaintiff filed a reply to the claim of alimony, counsel fees, etc., denied the material allegations, and entered a plea of the three-years and ten-years statutes of limitations in bar of the claim.
The court, after notice and hearing, awarded alimony pendente lite and counsel fees. From this order the plaintiff prosecutes this appeal.
B. W. Blackwelder, for plaintiff, appellant.
Bedford W. Black and James E. Roberts, by James E. Roberts, for defendant, appellee.

Opinion:
PeR CüRiam.
The superior court, after notice and hearing, entered an order allowing alimony pendente lite and counsel fees. The showing was sufficient to support the order. Other questions must await the final hearing.
Affirmed.